Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The Net Theory

  1. Nov 15, 2003 #1
    Everything can be explained.
    Why did the universe become? Why was it so warm in the beginning?
    I think I have found the solution.


    We all know that there were not nothing in the beginning.
    I think nothing is what we call an even patern of something and unsomething.
    That something exist demands that unsomething exist.
    I also believe that something and unsomething in the beginning
    were in a random order all over the universe, forming a chaos.
    This is where the net theory takes over.
    Since every point in the universe counts as an origo,
    the universe should be a net without tripods that holds it up.
    An origo in the net would've been either something or unsomething,
    positive or negative, sink or source (http://www.beotel.yu/~mmalovic/boblock/mass.htm)
    In my theory, net is moving from the source in a spiral
    (imagine yourself emptying a bathtub,
    although the net is moving from a place and the net is getting thinner in that place, it's not comming from another spatial dimension)
    and against the sink in an opposite spiral
    (imagine water flowing up from the sewers and filling your bathtub,
    although the net is moving against a place and the net is getting thicker in that place, it's not dissappearing into another spatial dimension).
    Boblock tried to explain how two particles with the same charge
    under special circumstances could attract eachother
    with a special gravitational theory that can be read at:
    http://www.beotel.yu/~mmalovic/boblock/gravity.htm and is partly true.
    It is said that he died in cancer.
    If the sink or source was not in a net, particles wouldn't effect eachother.
    Let's say two charges moves in the same speed and direction.
    seen from our referencesystem, the electric force between the charges
    gets weaker the faster they move due of the magnetical force.
    Seen from another valid referencesystem
    moving in the same speed and direction as the charges,
    there is no magnetical force.
    The magnetical force is a relativistic effect.
    both the charges are relativistic.
    cq0 (1-v02/c2)½/(r210-7)½
    is the force field from one charge,

    cq1 (1-v12/c2)½/(r210-7)½)
    is the force field from the other.
    The force between q1 and q0 becomes:
    q0q1 ( (c2 - v02) (c2 - v12) ) ½/(r210-7)
    When charged particles move in a chain through a bend whire,
    but the electron sum in the whire is almost equal to the proton sum,
    the resulting force is thereby
    q0v0q1v1
    /(107*f(r))
    where f(r) is a consequence of the shape of the whire

    Four dimensions

    In Minkowski's world, we have four dimensions.
    But does the equation:
    x20 + y20 + z20 + (ict)20 = x21 + y21 + z21 + (ict)21
    really say that there is four or more dimensions?
    No, it doesn't.
    x2 + y2 + z2 + (ict)2 = 0
    in al cases,
    but the roomtimedistance can be written as
    s + icts
    which always is
    s + is = s(1 + i) = (x2 + y2 + z2) ½ (1 + i),
    And this is ofcourse true since their is an imaginary timedistance
    between two points along a coordinate also.
    The first coordinate would be x(1 + i), the second y(1 + i) and the third z(1 + i).
    Since
    (1 + i) = (2i)½
    their is only need for three coordinates.
    Else there would've been six (which is possible ofcourse, though unnecessary).
    If i'm right, length passes just as quick as time does.
    We might be just as tall today as yesterday,
    but the length we had yesterday is not the same as the length we have today.
    Maybe your lunch was half an hour long both yesterday and today,
    but the half an hour you had lunch on yesterday
    was not the same half an hour you have lunch on today.
    since net is moving against or from every cube in the net at the speed of light,
    length does also pass, although we do not think about it.
    Thereby, there are only three dimensions.
    The fact that time and length passes is not an dimension:
    It's a consequence of that everything exist, of that everything is relative
    and of that the net cannot stop moving against or from a point if it once started
    cause the net has no tripods.
    In my theory, the strong force must be
    a consequence of two charged cubes shadowing eachother.
    A leptone is a charged cube covered with cubes with the opposite charge
    in their turns possibly covered with cubes with the opposite charge to that layer etc.
    A charge is "spacevolume" passing per timeunit
    in Boblocks simple unified field theory also:

    L3/T.

    Gravity would be the consequence of that
    the risk is higher to find positive particles near negative,
    than the risk to find positive particles near positive
    and to find negative particles near negative together,
    cause positive particles attracts negative in this chaotic quantum universe.
    The weak force would be the consequence
    of that the risk is higher to find positive particles shadowing negative,
    than the risk to find positive particles shadowing positive
    and to find negative particles shadowing negative together.
    If gravity is not a consequence of the electromagnetic force is some way
    my theory falls.
    It would not work at all.
    Since something and unsomething was in random order in the beginning,
    the possibility of an even patern was only 50%.
    The uneven patern became photons that eventually became leptons.
    My theory is that energy haven't disappeared in the universe.
    That the leptones have formed pretty homogene "ethers" inside the galaxies.
    That's why gravity sometimes move in overlightspeed.
    An ether with a higher speedlimit can temporarily form.
    The size of the leptones in the "ether" decides which speed that is the maximum.
    Since we are a part of the "ether", it's hard for us to understand that there is one.
    Light moves away slower from an object
    if it moves in the same direction as the object, seen from a distance.
    Seen from the object, light moves away in the same speed from the object
    whether or not it moves.
    The ether i am describing don't forbid that.
    Net is moving in the same speed against or from every point.
    We can messaure length passing, spassing, with a clock,
    and also note how long the pointer have moved spointer,
    in two different objects; object0 and object1
    When the pointer has moved one lapp, object0 moves the length sobject0
    and object1 moves the length sobject1
    all seen from a third referencesystem.

    With the triangleproof, we can see that:
    s2passing0 - s2object0 = s2passing1 - s2object1 and thereby s2pointer0*k2 - s2object0 = s2pointer1k2 - s2object1 This means my theory does not violate the special theory of relativity.

    If boblock was right,
    aa
    bb
    would lead to:
    a bb a
    since b attracts b and a repells a were b is sink and a is source.
    Let's say this is a primitive sort of helium atom.
    If two b are on a distance from eachother, it is discovered that they move from eachother:
    <-- b b -->
    This is possible, since the net is flexible.
    To a very, very high point.

    Neither sinks nor sources needs more than 3 dimensions;
    onedimensional SUPERstrings don't have volume.

    So the universe is surely neverendingly big. And the universe was not a singularity in the beginning. It was a caotic net in wich energy all the time turns into;
    yes, ethers.

    and since two inverse cubes cannot be a third, energyquantas would be impossible in universes with more than three dimensions.
    Please remember Rydberg's equation. I have writen this once before. But not here.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 18, 2003
  2. jcsd
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Can you help with the solution or looking for help too?
Draft saved Draft deleted



Similar Discussions: The Net Theory
  1. The Net (Replies: 1)

  2. Net displacement (Replies: 2)

  3. Net force? (Replies: 1)

  4. Net torque (Replies: 4)

Loading...