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

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #476731

Re: The Particulate Theory of Relativity

Show all headers | View raw

Am 08.11.2018 um 23:04 schrieb Alan Folmsbee:
> On Wednesday, November 7, 2018 at 10:58:59 AM UTC-10, Thomas Heger wrote:
>> Am 07.11.2018 um 17:47 schrieb Alan Folmsbee:
>>
>>> Dear TH and other correspondents,
>>>
>>> It is gratifying to read your intelligent responses.
>>> Yes neutrons cause gravity and protons cause gravity.
>>> Electrons do not, they are always paired with protons
>>> in matter.
>>
>> I have an alternative explanation for particles, especially protons and
>> electrons.
>>
>> I assume, that protons and electrons are 'one thing'.
>>
>> That 'thing' is a certain kind of 'standing rotation wave'.
>>
>> It's a little similar to a 'Jo-Jo' in free space, with vacuum and zero
>> gravity.
>>
>> The outer shell of the wave has potential, because there is something,
>> what can move away.
>>
>> The inner core is the turning point, where the Jo-Jo is full, flips over
>> and unrolls again.
>>
>> The string is not held by a finger, but by the axis of time.
>>
>>
>>
>> Now we have two stable states:
>> one rotates  horizontal (around the axis of time)
>> one rolls like a barrel (around a spacelike axis)
>>
>> Since the second is only meta-stable, it can eventually flip over to the
>> side and change from proton to neutron, releasing an electron.
>>
>>
>>
>> (Sorry: this is only an analogue picture, not a theory in physics.)
>>
>> But in case you are interested, you can read my 'book':
>>
>> https://docs.google.com/present/view?id=dd8jz2tx_3gfzvqgd6
>>
>>
>>> Relativity experiments are always using protons
>>> in the laboratory apparatus. Frames of reference
>>> for those tests always are frames of matter.
>>>
>>> A balance of nature is shown as gravity makes space go into
>>> matter and time grows out. Standard science is vague about
>>> time. This new Gravity Volume Theory provides more details
>>> about time than ever before. Your baryons are the source of
>>> your times.
>>
>> Well, maybe. Actually I do not know.
>>
>> I think that time is a local measure, by what we bring certain changes
>> into a logic order.
>>
>>
>>> Every nucleus uses relative growth of time and relative
>>> drainage of space to keep the strong nuclear force to be
>>> a form of gravity. Higher derivatives of time and mixed
>>> partial derivatives of spacetime components are used in
>>> The Particulate Theory of Relativity.
>>>
>>> One physicist here doubted that protons have any importance
>>> in relativity. That kind of doubt is born from a hope
>>> that old dogma will always rule over this new progress.
>>> This is Future Science.
>>>
>>> Links to these theories is on this page:
>>> http://fcgravity.blogspot.com/
>>> for the fusion continuum efforts to make a future
>>> with abundant, cheap electricity. Join the team,
>>> send an email: omnilobe at gmail dot com.
>>
>> I cannot read that today, but have put a bookmark on it in my browser
>> and read it later.
>>
>> With so called 'free energy devices' I am still a little skeptic, since
>> I have never seen anything working.
>>
>> But I wish you good luck and would like to know, whether or not you had
>> some success.
>>
>>
>> TH
> 
> Hello TH,
> I doubt any free energy devices also. For today, I want to
> emphasize Relativity:
> 
> The Particulate Theory of Relativity uses the curvature of
> space and time, like Einstein's algebra provides. But the curvature
> is not only for planets, it is for nuclear fusion. The curvature
> of a proton is the radius r:
> 
> 
> 0.83fm < r < 0.99fm
> 
> The small radius of the proton and neutron is very tight
> compared to the Schwarzschild radius formula. 

My aim was to connect GR to QM. So I tried to make particles out of 
spacetime.

Cosmology and black holes are not really in my focus.

Actually I think, that 'black holes' are nothing but an optical illusion 
(like a mirage), because relativity is always about mutual relations.

Therefor the black hole must vanish, if you come close and you would see 
one somewhere else.

E.g. if you travel from Earth to the galactic black hole in the center 
of our galaxy, the picture would change and the Earth would vanish in a 
black hole, while nothing strange would happen there.


It is not
> the mass of a proton that curves space, it is a boundary
> at the end of our space measurements. The boundary condition
> is used for a hydrodynamic flow of spacetime into a nucleus.
> Time cannot penetrate a proton, so it flows around the radius.
> Space flow for the strong nuclear force cannot penetrate
> every proton, so it flows around and into the gaps between
> baryons.
> 
> That is why relativity is appropriate as a description
> of particulate interactions.
> 
One thing I usually try to avoid is the question 'what is spacetime'.

'Strange perfect frictionless fluid under pressure' would fit or 'nothing'.

But I do not cover this question and actually do not know.

I assume something smooth, but the 'points' should have features.

These features build patterns and if those are timelike stable, we call 
that 'matter'.

TH

Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

The Particulate Theory of Relativity Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2018-10-17 10:08 -0700
  Re: The Particulate Theory of Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-17 20:11 -0500
    Re: The Particulate Theory of Relativity Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2018-10-22 13:53 -0700
      Re: The Particulate Theory of Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-10-23 17:54 -0700
        Re: The Particulate Theory of Relativity Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2018-10-26 11:06 -0700
          Re: The Particulate Theory of Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-26 14:09 -0500
            Re: The Particulate Theory of Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-26 19:27 -0700
            Re: The Particulate Theory of Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-28 10:06 +0100
            Re: The Particulate Theory of Relativity RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2018-11-04 19:49 -0800
              Re: The Particulate Theory of Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-05 12:59 +0000
                Re: The Particulate Theory of Relativity RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2018-11-05 19:00 -0800
                Re: The Particulate Theory of Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-06 03:38 +0000
                Re: The Particulate Theory of Relativity RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2018-11-06 17:50 -0800
        Re: The Particulate Theory of Relativity alsor@interia.pl - 2018-10-26 14:01 -0700
      Re: The Particulate Theory of Relativity alsor@interia.pl - 2018-10-26 14:09 -0700
  Re: The Particulate Theory of Relativity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2018-11-06 09:14 +0100
    Re: The Particulate Theory of Relativity "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-06 07:45 -0800
    Re: The Particulate Theory of Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-06 22:25 +0100
      Re: The Particulate Theory of Relativity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2018-11-07 09:57 +0100
        Re: The Particulate Theory of Relativity Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2018-11-07 08:47 -0800
          Re: The Particulate Theory of Relativity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2018-11-07 21:58 +0100
            Re: The Particulate Theory of Relativity Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2018-11-08 14:04 -0800
              Re: The Particulate Theory of Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-11-08 15:58 -0800
                Re: The Particulate Theory of Relativity Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2018-11-09 15:31 -0800
                Re: The Particulate Theory of Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-11-09 17:03 -0800
              Re: The Particulate Theory of Relativity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2018-11-10 21:16 +0100
                Re: The Particulate Theory of Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-10 22:31 +0100
                Re: The Particulate Theory of Relativity Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2018-11-11 15:29 -0800
                Re: The Particulate Theory of Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-12 03:45 +0100
                Re: The Particulate Theory of Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-12 04:27 +0100
                Re: The Particulate Theory of Relativity Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2018-11-12 08:52 -0800
                Re: The Particulate Theory of Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-13 19:46 +0100

csiph-web