Recent content by paglren

It seems to me that every body turning around a star is actually rotating on its own axis at some angular speed. What do you think about the lightning effect causing rotation? I.e.: could be the light influence of the main star the only cause for the dark objects to rotate (the mass obviously...

Hi Lurch what you say means that Uranus is more perpendicular than Earth? My question might be misinterpreted: Are there planets or bodies in general that have rotation axis perpendicular to revolution axis?

I'm searching for a theory that explains why the Earth is rotating on its axis and how long ago it began to do it. I should like to know, also, if rotation is common to all planets or there are some bodies that don't rotate. Are there any bodies that have their rotation axis parallel to their...

Sorry, but also a simple concept is "something". The most fascinating answer to the question is that "everything" is coming out from "nothing", or better from the infinite "way" (out of space-time) in which "nothing" represents its own concept. In other words: since "absolute nothing" (i.e...

My point is that vacuum background energy depends from masses that are / have been existent since Universe starting time: I.e. energy isn't a vacuum's property. Vacuum ha no property (or it isn't vacuum). I agree. In fact I think that time (like as matter) does "exist" and "non-exist" in an...

Why don't you admit that an antinomy can be stated but cannot be stated it's trueness or falseness? The answer to your question is a series of infinite: Yes-No-Yes-No-... to be affirmed in zero time. And this is a very interesting start point for intuition of what is inside matter and anything...

As many of participants to this thread have already said: "nothing" is nothing. But this frase is an Antinomy (i.e. it declares its own falseness as true). I think that this particular antinomy, being by definition outside any language contest (there's no language yet defined), can be...

It is simpler to think of nothing as the only ... thing that has not to be explained by nobody: it explains by itself... and this make all to exist. If we speak about space we are immerged in time. If we speak of time we are in some place of space. Fortunately nothingness can always express...

Masses and speed light This is true only at light speed or close: then space, time and light speed have to be strictly related each other. My point is that speed light c is embedded in space-time: as to say that space is "generated" at speed light by the presence of a mass. Think of masses...

Is time existent where there are no masses? Time is not an independent variable. It is strictly related to space. So if time does not exist then also space would not exist. Think at "time" as a clock like that one that makes computer CPU run: it is something "orthogonal" to space frame. What...

Nothing, or Nothingness, is an antinomy Nothing, or Nothingness, is an antinomy: it negate itself as a thing though it's representation IS evidently something. The interesting fact is that this antinomy is really outside of any language contest, so we could affirm that it is the "seed of...

You are the first person who seems to understand what I'm looking for(perhaps you are intuitive as me). I don't believe in anything... but I believe in intuition of minds. I think that intuition goes beyond the limits of mind and of the system in which we are sinked. So I'm not so sure that...

I read almost all that you wrote. I think that your theory could be interesting, but I'm dealing with a problem that is at the basis of knowledge itself: How can an inhabitant of a (generic) universe perceive the "system"? Your theory leads to something everlasting (you say energy) principle...

Do you think that is there anything that everlasts in aethernum? How is it possible that ether (what is it in effect and which is its relation with matter?) changes its density without proper mass? I think that a fish in water couldn't say anything about the medium in which he is immerged...

What about the mass to be the only "actor"? Think of photon's impact (and force exercited) as a "mass reaction" to something. This thing could be another "mass action" that is modifying the space-curve accordingly with the observed effect. By such assumption light is not "travelling" through...