Looking for honest peer !

Then you understand energy and momentum .........whoops !

 

Was just re-reading what you wrote and once again as well as being mathematically deficient it's grammatically and/syntactically lacking too.

Are you saying that force is less than or equal to energy or that the force is less than the energy. Neither actually makes sense scientifically, and =< is nonsense (<= means less than or equal to). If you mean less than, then the "=" is redundant.

 

Its says the force is less than the energy

F=<E

 

Again, more rubbish and gibberish...

P = E /< E = c

literally a makes no sense as a scientific equation.

What is P ?

What does "/ <" mean, it's not any kind of standard notation.

E = c is nonsense if E is energy, once again the units don't match.

 

You said you know maths and you don't know that P is used for momentum ?

and < is less than ?

and divide is / ?

 

Then the "=" is redundant and the equation should be F<E

The equation is still utter nonsense because the units do not match, force is in newtons, energy is in joules.

Even worse force is a vector, energy is a scalar.

 

Who knows what you mean in an equation - that's why I ask so according to you

What on earth does "/ <" mean - divided by less than ?

 

Which part of new advanced physics don't you understand ?

But thank you for the correction I can see how that reads better , F<E .

Although force is equal to a lesser energy still makes sense to me .

 

Ok, consider a single point charge , ZPE (zero point energy ) and consider the surrounding points of that point , they are a lesser energy . The lesser energy of these surrounding points disperse / divide the ZPE up , fragment it to 0 existence .

OK ?

If you'd actually read my theory !

''The Micro bang theory proposes that from the instant of manifestation of the mono-pole electrostatic point charge , it is instantly attracted to all the surrounding lesser energy space in an isotropic manner . Thus causing self annihilation of the mono-pole electrostatic point charge''

''In consideration of thermal dynamics and spectral emissions , the high energy state points energy , traverses to lower energy state points ''

 

I cannot read your theory because your English is unintelligible. That's why I'd like to focus on your maths - which is equally unintelligible but more transparently so.

 

It may make sense to you, but it's utter nonsense scientifically and mathematically or indeed in English.

You simply cannot compare two things that have a different units - it's like saying that my weight is greater than your height.

 

Dude , if you can't understand the transition of ''hot'' to ''cold'' and simple thermodynamics , I suggest you quit your job if it is in science .

E / <E is very basic ....

 

I understand simple thermodynamics.

I also know that you cannot compare terms with different units, especially if one is a vector and the other a scalar

Humour me - reading it literally

"Energy divided by less than energy" - which is utter nonsense.

 

No it's not , you're not thinking !

If the state of energy surrounding a spatial point is a lesser energy than the spatial point , by the simple laws of thermodynamics and spectral emissions , the ''hot'' is attracted to the ''colder'' points . The lesser energy in affect , dividing up the point energy .

E / <E

It explains the math and process in one summation . Obviously E will have some value of joules or charge and <E will have an n-dimensional volume .

 

Once again you're demonstrating your lack of knowledge and your inability to construct an equation.

You cannot compare energy and volume. Once again it's like saying someone's heavier than someone else is tall.

 

Maybe you should cite something, because so far your posts have too many problems.

 

In physics, the second law of thermodynamics says that heat flows naturally from an object at a higher temperature to an object at a lower temperature, and heat doesn't flow in the opposite direction of its own accord.

The emission spectrum of a chemical element or chemical compound is the spectrum of frequencies of electromagnetic radiation emitted due to an atom or molecule making a transition from a high energy state to a lower energy state.


My math E / <E

Momentum P=<E

F<E

OK , is it really that difficult to understand ?

Q- / k = 0

A charge divided by an infinite volume space that gives the answer of a zero charge density .

Is that so difficult to understand ?

The Micro bang theory proposes that from the instant of manifestation of the mono-pole electrostatic point charge, they are instantly attracted to all the surrounding lesser energy space in an isotropic manner . Thus causing self annihilation of the mono-pole electrostatic point charge .

 

That's not a cite.

I want to see a document on line written by a serious physicist.

 

It doesn't exist , my theory is way more advanced than anything you'll find created before . It is new , my own work advancing present information . Very accurate ...

 

continued..

3. Binary energy particle ( A quantum singularity )

In the previous section , we discussed Micro Bangs in which was demonstrated , a mono-pole point charge manifestation has no mechanism to retain form or density, in an infinite volume of lesser energy absolute space . Thus leading us to consider the aspects of how a binary energy point particle could manifest and retain its form and density to remain in existence . A binary is something based of two parts , in consideration of this I ask you to preliminary accept Q- and Q+ in being the two individual parts that will construct the binary energy particle and proposed Quantum singularity that started the beginning of meaningful time .
We will now consider any random point of absolute space , we'll now also consider a simultaneous manifestation of Q- and Q+ at this given point , both opposite charged mono-poles simultaneously occupying the same point . We know by our present founded laws of physics and Coulombs law of charge , that likewise charges repel and opposite charges attract ! Q- and Q+ being opposite charges , attracted to each other by natural laws .
The Universe inside and out proposes that the natural law of attraction of opposite charge and a simultaneous manifestation of Q- and Q+ occupying the same spatial point , forms an instantaneous bond that allows the two individual mono-poles to form a binary energy particle that retains form and density .

 

Returning to my, for this thread, reference site:

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html

 

A typical response from the ignorant and arrogant . All you know is your memories , most of your memories are somebody else's work and thoughts . Please don't get me started and have me explain in a neurological way how ''stupid'' and naive you actually are .
You've no idea how to have a discussion , you've no idea how to think for yourself . Keep posting present information and views is irrelevant to my new theory . The new theory that you don't really discuss or think about why it could be correct .
My theory uses basic laws of present physics , are you saying these basic laws I use are incorrect?

Mathematicians use Q to represent a charge , fact !

Q- / k = 0 passes as an equation to represent charge divided by infinite volume , the results 0 magnitude and 0 density of the divided charge is a correct result .

The force of this process as corrected on this forum F<E , is correct !

The momentum represented by P with an arrow above it for this process is P=<E

I can't do the arrow with a keyboard !

Also in a generalised expression E / <E is also correct . Finally for this post ,

E / <E = c which is also correct !

added : 1E³ = 4/3 pi r³

 

No, please go ahead - that way it's clear to everyone what kind of person you really are

I'm saying that it's very difficult to determine what you're saying because when you try to explain it in English it's largely unintelligible and you seem to be unable to express it mathematically.

If you are using existing laws you are either misapplying them, misunderstanding them or a combination of the two.

You are proposing a complete change to the laws of physics where you have no experimental evidence to support those changes, no mathematical model to underpin it and you find it impossible to describe it coherently. You claim that relativistic physics is wrong but are unable to point out the flaws in the mathematics and handwave away the fact that Einstein's work is supported by a huge volume of experimental evidence - and equipment we use every day relies upon it to work.

 

I've highlighted your obvious lies ! Your writing and wording reads the same as my writing and wording , so how do you explain this if you claim it is unintelligible ?

I'm not misapplying laws , I've even posted some of these laws in supporting evidence .

My maths works .

As for the rest of your post ...

Introduction.

The Universe inside and out is a scientific investigation and research project that has taken over a decade to complete that considers past physics and present physics . A journey of discover that will advance present science thoughts and theory , correcting semantic errors and incorrect interpretation , opening up a whole new era of science in regards to physics and physical process .
The Universe inside and out makes reference to Dirac , Newton , Higgs , Tesla and Einstein , concluding an united field theory namely the N-field theory , an united field theory that explains the beginning of the visual universe , unites field matter ( spatial quantum fields ) and atomic matter ( Visible objects ) into an united manifold that is independent of space. Additionally the Universe inside and out explains the gravity mechanism , the true nature of light and the meaning of time .

You haven't a clue pal !

 

3. Binary energy particle ( A quantum singularity )

In the previous section , we discussed Micro Bangs in which was demonstrated , a mono-pole point charge manifestation has no mechanism to retain form or density, in an infinite volume of lesser energy absolute space . Thus leading us to consider the aspects of how a binary energy point particle could manifest and retain its form and density to remain in existence . A binary is something based of two parts , in consideration of this I ask you to preliminary accept Q- and Q+ in being the two individual parts that will construct the binary energy particle and proposed Quantum singularity that started the beginning of meaningful time .
We will now consider any random point of absolute space , we'll now also consider a simultaneous manifestation of Q- and Q+ at this given point , both opposite charged mono-poles simultaneously occupying the same point . We know by our present founded laws of physics and Coulombs law of charge , that likewise charges repel and opposite charges attract ! Q- and Q+ being opposite charges , attracted to each other by natural laws .
The Universe inside and out proposes that the natural law of attraction of opposite charge and a simultaneous manifestation of Q- and Q+ occupying the same spatial point , forms an instantaneous bond that allows the two individual mono-poles to form a binary energy particle that retains form and density .

If you can't understand the above , I suggest you go back to school !