Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #373398 > unrolled thread

Mandelbrot Universe (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999

Started byDavid Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com>
First post2016-01-06 05:59 -0800
Last post2016-01-08 12:55 -0800
Articles 20 on this page of 34 — 5 participants

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity

Contents

  Mandelbrot Universe (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999 David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-06 05:59 -0800
    Mandelbrot Universe (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999 David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-06 06:00 -0800
      Mandelbrot Universe (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999 David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-06 12:36 -0800
        Re: Mandelbrot Universe (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999 The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-01-06 14:01 -0800
          Re: Mandelbrot Universe (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999 David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-06 21:05 -0800
            Re: Mandelbrot Universe (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999 David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-07 10:40 -0800
          Re: Mandelbrot Universe (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999 David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-07 10:42 -0800
            Re: Mandelbrot Universe (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999 The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-01-07 12:17 -0800
              Re: Mandelbrot Universe (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999 David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-07 16:53 -0800
                Re: Mandelbrot Universe (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999 Sebastian Krüger <SebastianKruger@ih3hghjgb.org> - 2016-01-08 01:03 +0000
                  Re: Mandelbrot Universe (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999 The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-01-07 22:27 -0800
                    Re: Mandelbrot Universe (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999 The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-01-09 11:58 -0800
                Re: Mandelbrot Universe (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999 The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-01-07 22:31 -0800
                  Re: Mandelbrot Universe (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999 David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-08 08:40 -0800
      Re: Mandelbrot Universe (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999 David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-08 11:06 -0800
    Re: Mandelbrot Universe (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999 Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-01-08 14:15 +1100
      Re: Mandelbrot Universe (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999 David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-08 08:32 -0800
      Re: Mandelbrot Universe (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999 David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-08 08:39 -0800
        Re: Mandelbrot Universe (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999 Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-01-09 11:11 +1100
          Re: Mandelbrot Universe (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999 David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-10 22:33 -0800
            Re: Mandelbrot Universe (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999 Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-01-11 19:08 +1100
              Re: Mandelbrot Universe (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999 David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-11 10:45 -0800
                Re: Mandelbrot Universe (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999 Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-01-12 09:59 +1100
                  Re: Mandelbrot Universe (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999 David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-11 17:39 -0800
                    Re: Mandelbrot Universe (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999 Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-01-12 13:28 +1100
                      Re: Mandelbrot Universe (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999 David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-12 07:29 -0800
                        Re: Mandelbrot Universe (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999 David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-12 07:50 -0800
                      Re: Mandelbrot Universe (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999 Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2016-01-12 18:26 +0100
                        Re: Mandelbrot Universe (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999 David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-12 12:29 -0800
                          Re: Mandelbrot Universe (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999 David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-12 17:11 -0800
                            Re: Mandelbrot Universe (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999 David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-13 10:42 -0800
                        Re: Mandelbrot Universe (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999 David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-12 13:42 -0800
      Re: Mandelbrot Universe (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999 David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-08 09:08 -0800
    Re: Mandelbrot Universe (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999 David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-08 12:55 -0800

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#373398 — Mandelbrot Universe (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999

FromDavid Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com>
Date2016-01-06 05:59 -0800
SubjectMandelbrot Universe (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999
Message-ID<fce6d16f-59d4-4c4b-af92-a06171915466@googlegroups.com>
(4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#373399

FromDavid Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com>
Date2016-01-06 06:00 -0800
Message-ID<5711674d-b0f3-4c0d-a6dd-e7620be355e0@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#373398
((299 792 458.178 * 100)^(e^(i * pi))) * 2 = 6.6712819e-11 
> 
> 100 - 1 = 99 
> 
> https://youtu.be/qhbuKbxJsk8?t=9m39s 
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandelbrot_set 

https://youtu.be/K8P8uFahAgc?t=2m1s 
https://youtu.be/K8P8uFahAgc?t=3m24s 


(49.5*299792458)^(e^(i*pi)) 
Mandelbrot 

100 - 1 = 99 /2 

https://youtu.be/qhbuKbxJsk8?t=9m39s 

50/7-4

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#373419

FromDavid Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com>
Date2016-01-06 12:36 -0800
Message-ID<5f67a9af-07a6-4381-b8f0-5d3021e27a2e@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#373399
Orthogonal grid of 100 inside radial 50

A radial singularity transformed into orthogonal grid

http://i63.tinypic.com/2cofvp3.jpg

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#373427

FromThe Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com>
Date2016-01-06 14:01 -0800
Message-ID<568D8ED2.3D73@ix.netcom.com>
In reply to#373419
David Fuller wrote:
> 
> Orthogonal grid of 100 inside radial 50
> 
> A radial singularity transformed into orthogonal grid
> 
> http://i63.tinypic.com/2cofvp3.jpg


Mandelbrot Universe, is another word for a mathematical universe..an
invention...a math invention.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#373439

FromDavid Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com>
Date2016-01-06 21:05 -0800
Message-ID<f76cc4c1-83b7-4881-aef3-ce1067e67315@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#373427
(4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999 
1/(1-0.9999) = 10^4

X Y Z T
10X 10Y 10Z 10T

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#373466

FromDavid Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com>
Date2016-01-07 10:40 -0800
Message-ID<0d88ad91-50f2-4ba2-a88c-42f6b496b306@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#373439
On Wednesday, January 6, 2016 at 11:05:35 PM UTC-6, David Fuller wrote:
> (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999 
> 1/(1-0.9999) = 10^4
> 
> X Y Z T
> 10X 10Y 10Z 10T

1/(99/495) = 5


(4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#373467

FromDavid Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com>
Date2016-01-07 10:42 -0800
Message-ID<9dd4ee63-70e1-4b50-af11-09907e6ffebc@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#373427
> Mandelbrot Universe, is another word for a mathematical universe..an
> invention...a math invention.

http://i63.tinypic.com/2cofvp3.jpg

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#373481

FromThe Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com>
Date2016-01-07 12:17 -0800
Message-ID<568EC7F4.3FAD@ix.netcom.com>
In reply to#373467
David Fuller wrote:
> 
> > Mandelbrot Universe, is another word for a mathematical universe..an
> > invention...a math invention.
> 


an invention by man...does not exist anywhere else.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#373500

FromDavid Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com>
Date2016-01-07 16:53 -0800
Message-ID<953582f8-dc90-4f43-ae60-108cdae74a48@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#373481
The Starmaker wrote: 
> 
> > Mandelbrot Universe, is another word for a mathematical universe..an 
> > invention...a math invention. 
> 



an invention by man...does not exist anywhere else. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_Hadron_Collider

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oh-My-God_particle


detected on the evening of 15 October 1991 over Dugway Proving Ground, Utah, by the University of Utah's Fly's Eye Cosmic Ray Detector.[1][2] Its observation was a shock to astrophysicists (hence the name), who estimated its energy to be approximately 3×10^20 eV (3×10^8 TeV, about 20 million times more energetic than the highest energy measured in radiation emitted by an extragalactic object);[3] in other words, an atomic nucleus with kinetic energy equal to 48 Joules, equivalent to a 5-ounce (142 g) baseball traveling at about 93.6 kilometers per hour (60 mph).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#373502

FromSebastian Krüger <SebastianKruger@ih3hghjgb.org>
Date2016-01-08 01:03 +0000
Message-ID<n6n1s9$oov$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#373500
David Fuller wrote:

> The Starmaker wrote:
>> > Mandelbrot Universe, is another word for a mathematical universe..an
>> > invention...a math invention. 
> 
> an invention by man...does not exist anywhere else.

Here is where people like you are getting it totally wrong. That Universe 
is Mathematically consistence, hence logical. Logicallity is probably the 
only thing which is NOT an "invention by man". It just IS, for lack of a 
better reasoning for why it is. I would even postulate that Math and Logic 
are Transcendental.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#373508

FromThe Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com>
Date2016-01-07 22:27 -0800
Message-ID<568F56C8.5ABB@ix.netcom.com>
In reply to#373502
Sebastian Krüger wrote:
> 
> David Fuller wrote:
> 
> > The Starmaker wrote:
> >> > Mandelbrot Universe, is another word for a mathematical universe..an
> >> > invention...a math invention.
> >
> > an invention by man...does not exist anywhere else.
> 
> Here is where people like you are getting it totally wrong. That Universe
> is Mathematically consistence, 

consistence with what? attaching symbols to patterns it all it is.

>hence logical. Logicallity is probably the
> only thing which is NOT an "invention by man". It just IS, 

Saying "It just IS", is hardley an Answer.


>for lack of a
> better reasoning for why it is. I would even postulate that Math and Logic
> are Transcendental.

a Platonists.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#373589

FromThe Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com>
Date2016-01-09 11:58 -0800
Message-ID<5691664A.5448@ix.netcom.com>
In reply to#373508
The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> Sebastian Krüger wrote:
> >
> > David Fuller wrote:
> >
> > > The Starmaker wrote:
> > >> > Mandelbrot Universe, is another word for a mathematical universe..an
> > >> > invention...a math invention.
> > >
> > > an invention by man...does not exist anywhere else.
> >
> > Here is where people like you are getting it totally wrong. That Universe
> > is Mathematically consistence,
> 
> consistence with what? attaching symbols to patterns it all it is.
> 
> >hence logical. Logicallity is probably the
> > only thing which is NOT an "invention by man". It just IS,
> 
> Saying "It just IS", is hardley an Answer.
> 
> >for lack of a
> > better reasoning for why it is. I would even postulate that Math and Logic
> > are Transcendental.
> 
> a Platonists.


if yous Platonists believe
the universe is mathematical..
then you're just a bag of numbers.

Show me the numbers.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#373509

FromThe Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com>
Date2016-01-07 22:31 -0800
Message-ID<568F57C6.4232@ix.netcom.com>
In reply to#373500
David Fuller wrote:
> 
> The Starmaker wrote:
> >
> > > Mandelbrot Universe, is another word for a mathematical universe..an
> > > invention...a math invention.
> >
> 
> an invention by man...does not exist anywhere else.
> 
> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_Hadron_Collider
> 
> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oh-My-God_particle
> 
> detected on the evening of 15 October 1991 over Dugway Proving Ground, Utah, by the University of Utah's Fly's Eye Cosmic Ray Detector.[1][2] Its observation was a shock to astrophysicists (hence the name), who estimated its energy to be approximately 3×10^20 eV (3×10^8 TeV, about 20 million times more energetic than the highest energy measured in radiation emitted by an extragalactic object);[3] in other words, an atomic nucleus with kinetic energy equal to 48 Joules, equivalent to a 5-ounce (1


The Large Hadron Collider is probably the biggest junk machine in the
world in my opinion. (snake oil)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#373524

FromDavid Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com>
Date2016-01-08 08:40 -0800
Message-ID<ef1a0b2b-d2b5-4144-bd98-3cb5d3de51a4@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#373509
On Friday, January 8, 2016 at 12:30:49 AM UTC-6, The Starmaker wrote:
> David Fuller wrote:
> > 
> > The Starmaker wrote:
> > >
> > > > Mandelbrot Universe, is another word for a mathematical universe..an
> > > > invention...a math invention.
> > >
> > 
> > an invention by man...does not exist anywhere else.
> > 
> > https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_Hadron_Collider
> > 
> > https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oh-My-God_particle
> > 
> > detected on the evening of 15 October 1991 over Dugway Proving Ground, Utah, by the University of Utah's Fly's Eye Cosmic Ray Detector.[1][2] Its observation was a shock to astrophysicists (hence the name), who estimated its energy to be approximately 3×10^20 eV (3×10^8 TeV, about 20 million times more energetic than the highest energy measured in radiation emitted by an extragalactic object);[3] in other words, an atomic nucleus with kinetic energy equal to 48 Joules, equivalent to a 5-ounce (1
> 
> 
> The Large Hadron Collider is probably the biggest junk machine in the
> world in my opinion. (snake oil)

http://emojipedia-us.s3.amazonaws.com/cache/9b/91/9b91736b776daabcdeb6c83c2399d8d6.png

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#373530

FromDavid Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com>
Date2016-01-08 11:06 -0800
Message-ID<e5177868-bebc-4fbb-adc5-93a6e17d6bdb@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#373399
On Wednesday, January 6, 2016 at 8:00:49 AM UTC-6, David Fuller wrote:
> ((299 792 458.178 * 100)^(e^(i * pi))) * 2 = 6.6712819e-11 



((299 792 458.178 * 99)^(e^(i * pi))) * 2 =  6.7386686e-11

(-2) / (-299792458.178 * 99) = 6.7386686e-11

99 + 1 = 100
99 = 51 = 150
(51 + 99) / 200 = 3/4 = 1/4

1 / 4 = N-1
https://youtu.be/qhbuKbxJsk8?t=6m25s

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#373504

FromSylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address>
Date2016-01-08 14:15 +1100
Message-ID<df8nugFd98eU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#373398
On 7/01/2016 12:59 AM, David Fuller wrote:
> (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999
>

The pi cancel. What's the point of including them in the first place?

Sylvia.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#373522

FromDavid Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com>
Date2016-01-08 08:32 -0800
Message-ID<42ba8dbc-9180-49d9-91b3-2f751c46573a@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#373504
On Thursday, January 7, 2016 at 9:15:32 PM UTC-6, Sylvia Else wrote:
> On 7/01/2016 12:59 AM, David Fuller wrote:
> > (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999
> >
> 
> The pi cancel. What's the point of including them in the first place?
> 
> Sylvia.

http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~jb/teaching/jmc/pi-in-mandelbrot.pdf

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0vY0CKYhPY

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#373523

FromDavid Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com>
Date2016-01-08 08:39 -0800
Message-ID<de02928e-b393-4eaa-817e-ac43f539fb81@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#373504
On Thursday, January 7, 2016 at 9:15:32 PM UTC-6, Sylvia Else wrote:
> On 7/01/2016 12:59 AM, David Fuller wrote:
> > (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999
> >
> 
> The pi cancel. What's the point of including them in the first place?
> 
> Sylvia.



4pi is included because c can be derived from 4pi*10^-7 if the (impedance of the vacuum^2) is considered as an invariant constant  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permeability_(electromagnetism)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#373546

FromSylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address>
Date2016-01-09 11:11 +1100
Message-ID<dfb1huFugqU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#373523
On 9/01/2016 3:39 AM, David Fuller wrote:
> On Thursday, January 7, 2016 at 9:15:32 PM UTC-6, Sylvia Else wrote:
>> On 7/01/2016 12:59 AM, David Fuller wrote:
>>> (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999
>>>
>>
>> The pi cancel. What's the point of including them in the first place?
>>
>> Sylvia.
>
>
>
> 4pi is included because c can be derived from 4pi*10^-7 if the (impedance of the vacuum^2) is considered as an invariant constant
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permeability_(electromagnetism)
>

That µ0 is 4pi * 10^-7 is just a matter of definition. Nothing of 
significance turns on it, and certainly nothing can meaningfully be 
derived from it.

Sylvia.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#373660

FromDavid Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com>
Date2016-01-10 22:33 -0800
Message-ID<23ecab3a-ecea-441d-be5d-0362e8a2d429@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#373546
On 9/01/2016 3:39 AM, David Fuller wrote: 
> On Thursday, January 7, 2016 at 9:15:32 PM UTC-6, Sylvia Else wrote: 
>> On 7/01/2016 12:59 AM, David Fuller wrote: 
>>> (4pi*10^-7)/((2pi/101)/49500) = 0.9999 
>>> 
>> 
>> The pi cancel. What's the point of including them in the first place? 
>> 
>> Sylvia. 
> 
> 
> 
> 4pi is included because c can be derived from 4pi*10^-7 if the (impedance of the vacuum^2) is considered as an invariant constant 
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permeability_(electromagnetism) 
> 

That µ0 is 4pi * 10^-7 is just a matter of definition. Nothing of 
significance turns on it, and certainly nothing can meaningfully be 
derived from it. 

Sylvia.

No .....
I have been following this newsgroup for 15 years

The implied impedance of the vacuum is always treated as an invariant constant 
NIST says it is a constant
NIST says u0 & e0 are constants. 
If all mass and energy was deleted from the vacuum of space time it would still be treated as having the same specified impedance. 

You seem to be being purposefully intellectually deceptive and dishonest.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity

csiph-web