1. Limited time only! Sign up for a free 30min personal tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Crackpot theories

  1. Mar 18, 2003 #1
    I want that you tell me your crackpots ideas. I'm curious. Ideas against the mainstream, but that can be hidden pearls.
    There are some of mine:
    -For me the Universe is or an alive organism living in its own cosmos, or a creation/experiment of some kind of upper intelligence. I'm not sure what option is better
    -The so-called quantum entanglement doesn't exist. For me is an error of measure.I believe that nothing can travel faster than light, like has been showed in particle accelerators
    -i don't believe in the existance of the Higgs boson. I think that is an idea too artificial
    Remember: Crackpot ideas sometimes are the base for advance of science
  2. jcsd
  3. Mar 23, 2003 #2
    Here goes-

    - dolphins communicate by transmitting 3d visual images using the same sonar stuff they use to look for food etc. Idea based on the clicks and whistles seeming more like modem chatter than speech and some stuff I saw on a documentary that showed dolphins identifying hidden 3d objects using sonar then communicating to other dolphins about which shape to go for food rewards.

    - This is hard to put in a paragraph but, 3d space does not actually exist. All 'particles' exist collocated as a wave like phenomenon and apparent distance is a product of a superposition of these waves. Light is not a particle in the same sense as it is a wave in the particle wave. Light then does not traverse space as we experience it but the wave exists in the emmitter particle until it meets the conditions which allow it to transfer to the absorber particle and is never present in the 3d space in between. That's the basic gist anyway.

    Crackpot enough???

    Raavin :wink:
  4. Mar 26, 2003 #3
    Gravity decreases as 1/r, and I can PROVE it.
  5. Mar 27, 2003 #4
    Believe it or not I thought up the idea that the movie the "Matrix" was all about, about 2 years before it came out. It wasn't exactly the same, but it was close enough. My idea was that my reality was just being pumped into my brain in the form of elecrtical impulses, performed by some group of scientists except I was the only "mind" in that reality. Like I'm in some giant interactive virtual reality.
    I coulda been a millionaire by now.
    Woulda, shoulda, coulda...
  6. Mar 28, 2003 #5


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Greetings !
    Bloody hell ! (with an English accent )
    I thought about us being brains in jars too
    before that movie came, I just haven't thought
    out the part about "taking over" computers and
    our bodies used as batteries...
    Imagine how much we could earn on the script !!!

    Hmm... crazy theories... used to think about plenty
    of those.

    - The Universe is infinite in time and space and
    hence we can do whatever we want because it all
    happens in infinite places at infinite times
    and our actions make no difference.
    (But, if the Universe "only" has the "limmited" size
    after the BB, then our actions do matter... :wink:)

    - BHs are just simple super-dense matter.

    - The WF collapse doesn't happen because when
    observed in different relativistic time frames
    the absorbtion of particles from a boolean type
    event occurs in a different order for each observer.
    Thus, either accept that the connection is
    not only FTL but also capable of changing the
    past or forget about WF collapse.
    (Never did see anything wrong with that idea.)

    - The interaction of particles inside a BH
    limmits their location uncertainty so much that
    their momentum uncertainty becomes too great and
    a singularity is avoided.

    - Planck energy scales limmit the maximum energy
    density inside a BH and prevent a singularity.

    Maybe I'll cook-up some crazy (and some not-so-crazy)
    stuff later... :smile:

    "When I examine myself and my methods of thought,
    I come to the conclusion that the gift of fantasy
    has meant more to me than my talent for absorbing
    positive knowledge."
    Albert Einstein

    Live long and prosper.
  7. Mar 30, 2003 #6
    rapid true polar wander

    No ice ages
    How about this for a crackpot hypothesis.

    There never have been ice ages and all the symptoms we think we see are to be attributed to true (geographical) polar wanders instead and quick ones too (only a mere 20,000 years whereas "regular" True Polar Wanders are supposed to last million years). Actually the alleged cold periods or the even Maritime (Oxygen) Isotope Stages (MIS 2,4,6 etc) have been Rapid True Polar Wanders (RTPW) instead. The pole ice sheets never advanced and retreated but migrated, following the wandering geographical poles. The RTPWs have probably been initiated by Paleo Magnetic Excursions (PME). The last RTPW was initiated by the Lachamps PME of 40,000 years ago. The first proof of it is dated around 28.000 years ago (when Ireland started to ice up). The North pole travelled from Canada via the Atlantic in a wide curve to the present position ending about 10,000 years ago. This for instance explains the ice sheet on Greenland instead of anywhere else.

    Furthermore, I think that all the existing evidence (ice cores sediment cores, glaciation fieldwork, etc,) supports the RTPW far better than the ice age theory. However, this crackpot hypothesis will end being a crackpot hypothesis as soon as it will be discovered that the Argentine pampa has been a tropical rain forest some 30,000 years ago.
  8. Mar 30, 2003 #7
    Hi O.M.F:

    I would be interested indeed in your theory as I have some thoughts on this myself.

  9. Mar 30, 2003 #8
    How about crackpots? Like I knew this guy when I was a cook, tell me he was going home to work on cold fusion. The only problem was that he had never picked up a physics book in his life and I am not sure he really knew what fusion was to begin with. I made a comment (I don't exactly remember it was a while ago) about how the real problem to overcome would be ion power. He of course replied something along the lines of yes that would be more worthy of his time. I got ion power from an episode of Star Trek.
  10. Mar 30, 2003 #9


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Isolated paranoia does not score as crackpottery ;)

    But well, you can get some crackpot ideas even from an unimaginative film as Matrix is (even the name comes from Dr. Who!). For instance, do u remember the point about deja-vu? I liked to link it to Everett many-world interpretation.

  11. Apr 5, 2003 #10
    planet X

    I think some of the people at PhysicsForums are familiar with this theory... the one about Planet X.

    Its very crackpotty.

    Its not mine. Mine was slightly tied to this PX theory but mine was a scenario where a mega asteroid (4 times larger than earth) was in an orbit that lasted 3600 years. (totally crackpotty!) Its g field disturbed the earth's orbit,wobble and relation of the earth's crust to the earth's core by passing too close for comfort on a gradual, approx. 20,000 year cycle. This explained the so called ice ages and certain mass extinctions that happened every so often (not caused by impacting asteriods). It also explained the wandering poles of the earth's axis.

    The whole theory was based on events we can witness today, in the cycle of comets we have in our vicinity. Like Haley's Comet... on an 86 year cycle. Like Kohoohooteck. Like Haley and the Bopettes comet. But, we can be fooled by standards set according to those events we chose to observe.

    What about events we have not observed? All we have are antiquated records of these.

    What I've come to find possible and most probably probable is that Emmanuel Volikovsky discovered something to do with the truth about our Solar System. There was an odd movement to suppress his findings. But, his calculations have kept popping up in other (astro)physicist's equasions... independent of Volikovsky.

    He believed Venus was ejected from Jupiter, 3600 years ago, and made a big mess of earth on her way to her present orbit. (Some of Earth's inhabitants, of the time, decided it was all a miracle performed by the big bearded guy)

    Volikovsky also theorized that Mars was caught up in the gravitational mayhem during the birth of the blue Venus... and suffered the loss of over half its crust, atmosphere and oceans... (where else have these comets composed of iced sea water flying around our solar system come hither?)

    But this isolated incident does not explain the continuously wandering poles of earth. Yet, another factor can help do that. Asteriods (<1k) impacting the Earth's crust could, conceivably, be forceful enough to shift the cooling crust over her molten nickle/iron core. This sort of infringement could also cause other geographical changes to immediately surround areas of the impact.

    "Relax your crack". Heftiver Hoovenstaat
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2003
  12. Apr 21, 2003 #11
    hi, say welcome to fresh meat :)

    - Universe is solid. Fundamental units in closest packing (ala Fuller), no movement whatsoever. Movement is illusion. Only interactions propagate. Fields are intensity of interactions in given space. Collisions of interactions (or cumulating interactions) is particles. Lack of collisions is empty space. Energy is perception, not actuality.
    - Reality is snapshot of state, observer being in coherent relation to the state. Next state is partly determined, partly indetermined due to localised indifference to possible new states.
    - Given 2 or more equal in _all_ respects ways to interact, something defines final path for interactions - absolute chance?
    - Sentient beings, being coherent to reality, possess free will, only in fraction of cases where all other criterias for decisions are indifferent (ie very rarely and in very small range), but due to exceeding localised space, possess wider picture and make decisions based on wider criteria. Thus, sentient beings "steer" absolute chance in direction of their will. Very slow, but cumulative process. Beings "shape" their reality, to a degree.
    - Complexification of subjects leads to ever more "educated" selections.
    - particles as we know them today are huge systems with their localised freedom of choice - planck indeterminism for macro scale.
    - particles .. are sentient, Universe is sentient. Fields and processes are sentient. At some scale, its hard to distinguish one subject from other - borders fade.
    - Free will exists even though extremely faint in face of complete determinism of logic and laws. Lets face it, most of the time we are machines.
  13. Apr 22, 2003 #12
    Here's my crackpotty hunch:
    UFO or extraterrestials exist!
    The government concels the truth for our own good so other nations aren't trying to steal the Rosewell debris and make things like fiber optics, computer chips, and anti-gravity devices.
    Also the aliens will do very little to help us because humanity is still an infant, and no one wants to give an infant a gun- analagous to great technology.
    I have no evidence for this whatsoever!
  14. Apr 22, 2003 #13
    Here's another crackpotty one,
    the stars twinkle at night because of all the dark matter or space junk floating around at high speed, occasionally enough of the stuff will line up sequencially just right for us to observe a few milliseconds of twinkle, of course later I read that it was because of the bending of light as it passes through the atmosphere, and any space telescope would have observed no twinkle.
    My best crackpot theory is on gravity,
    I ought to get the Crackpotty Theory of the Year award for it, I'll repost it.
  15. Apr 26, 2003 #14
    All speeds in space are relative therefore it is impossible to determine either a maximum or minimum speed except in relation to an object whose true speed is unknown. -Elas

    So to get cracked out here it is:
    From this one might wonder what if at the speed of light a thing was seen as light(from our reference point) but from the reference point of the thing moving at light speed, light speed things looked like normal matter moving very slowly... and what if when a thing stopped moving from our point of view it slipped into a lower "reference frame of motion" and became something moving very fast at near the speed of light...
    As if there were speed demensions and we only lived in one of them, and matter were partly defined by it's speed.
  16. Apr 27, 2003 #15
    last is good one, jammieg. not very crackpotty, better make a thread on that one.
  17. Nov 1, 2003 #16
    Your Basic Crackpot Theory of Everything

    The Basic Paradox’s existence & interactions create the 4 forces and 8 Energies. The 4 Forces, (realms of existence), each consist of a paradoxical duality. These forces combine with the duality to produce the 8 factors of life. These 4 forces & 8 factors create 8 fundamental vibrations, (8 Energies); 7 are easily perceived & 1 is not. The 8 factors combine with the 8 Energies to produce 16,777,216 dimensions, (these dimensions exist simultaneously in the same space & time). We usually perceive a maximum of 4,096 of them; but, because of our human perspective we think there are approximately 3,125, (i.e. ichinen sanzen). There are 22 fundamental numbers in creation, 20 have been discovered so far, (i.e. atomic physics).

    http://www.c2i2.com/~seven/paradox/paradox.htm [Broken]

    http://www.c2i2.com/~seven/paradox/T-o-E.htm [Broken]

    Slide Show
    http://www.c2i2.com/~seven/paradox/ppframe_files/frame.htm [Broken]
    Last edited by a moderator: May 1, 2017
  18. Nov 1, 2003 #17

    Potatoes created the universe. Before time and the universe began, they sacrificed one of their own. They hit the body with a hammer to make it more dense, and called it a singularity. That singularity is now expanding, and is our universe. This is also an explanation for why potatoes are one of the oldest known vegatables.
    [rho] [null] [gamma] [alpha] [gamma] [null]
  19. Nov 2, 2003 #18
    Hey fellas we have a new one

    “He believed Venus was ejected from Jupiter, 3600 years ago, and made a big mess of earth on her way to her present orbit. (Some of Earth's inhabitants, of the time, decided it was all a miracle performed by the big bearded guy)

    Volikovsky also theorized that Mars was caught up in the gravitational mayhem during the birth of the blue Venus... and suffered the loss of over half its crust, atmosphere and oceans... (where else have these comets composed of iced sea water flying around our solar system come hither?)

    But this isolated incident does not explain the continuously wandering poles of earth. Yet, another factor can help do that. Asteriods (<1k) impacting the Earth's crust could, conceivably, be forceful enough to shift the cooling crust over her molten nickle/iron core. This sort of infringement could also cause other geographical changes to immediately surround areas of the impact.”

    Related crackpot theory:

    Humanity has destroyed civilization numerous times. Evidence of the last destruction of an advanced civilization can be found in Hindu texts. Some of these texts are over 5,000 years old. The BHAGAVADGÎTÂ is note-worthy for its description of war and war machines; i.e.
    1. weapons that produce mushroom shaped clouds and ash that has to be washed off because it rots your skin
    2. flying machines shaped like a tube with bird like wings that sprout fire from the tail.
    3. etc., etc., etc.

    The asteroid belt used to be a planet that we destroyed with war; the moon was an escape vehicle from that destroyed planet, that we crashed into the Earth causing the axis wobble. We then destroyed Mars with war; before we emigrated to Earth. This theory proposes that we have been doing this for over 7,000,000,000 years.
    Last edited: Nov 3, 2003
  20. Nov 2, 2003 #19
    here is mine.........

    i belive
    -that particle is a lump of energy in space time that can be moved.
    -that mass is directly proportional to charge and speed.
    -that electrons dont exist, they are just induced spacetime having mass.
    -that gravity is caused by mass which is in turn caused by charge.

    All For God
  21. Nov 2, 2003 #20
    i accept..........

    i accept that fact suerly ufos and aliens exist it is juat being covered from us.
    these aliens or ufos could exist in another dimension

    this reminds me ofone more thing.
    i believe that atom exists differently in different dimensions.
  22. Nov 6, 2003 #21
    Big crunch

    1st off, I have no math or physics backround, and most of my education comes from the Discovery Science channel, so please forgive my ignorance.
    If the universe was collapsing, how could we tell?
    If there was a large black hole in the center of the universe left over from the big bang, wouldn't objects closer to the hole appear to be accelerating away from other objects further from the black hole? Thus all objects would appear to be accelerating away from some observation point within the universe. This fits what we can observe.
    We wouldn't need to add all those "dark matter" finagle factors to keep the universe expanding.
  23. Nov 6, 2003 #22


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Re: Big crunch

    If such a thing were happening, objects we see in the direction of that black hole and directly away from the black hole would indeed be accelerating away from us. But objects at right angles to the black hole would be accelerating toward us.
  24. Nov 6, 2003 #23


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    I was wondering if it would be possible to think of space as having 9 dimensions x,y,z,t,g,e,m,s,w -- 4 for normal 4-space and g,e,m,s,w for the forces.

    There's the ever-popular universe inside a black hole.
  25. Nov 6, 2003 #24
    big crunch expanded

    Wouldn't angular momentum force objects into decaying orbits? Thus objects not neccesary directly in line with the black hole would also appear to be heading away from the observing location.
    I have to grant that some objects would have to be moving towards us, but most would not. Have they found any galactic objects with a blue shift anywhere?
  26. Nov 6, 2003 #25

    Tom Mattson

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    So the gravitational potential is -ln(r), and diverges at both r=0 and r=&infin;?!

    I think you need to rethink this!
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook