Do you count dark matter and dark energy as part of the universe?

How does science work? And what's all this about quantum mechanics?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
Cerveny
Posts: 583
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 9:35 pm
Location: Czech Republic
Contact:

Re: Do you count dark matter and dark energy as part of the universe?

Post by Cerveny » Fri Feb 05, 2016 9:42 am

JSS wrote:
Cerveny wrote:
JSS wrote:And perhaps you should not be convinced yet because you have NOT been presented any proof yet.
Sorry, the logic and health sense should precede proofs. We need a finding of new model of the reality :(
Sorry, I just noticed that I left off the word "not" in that sentence. :oops:

"Logic and health"?? .. "health"??

I agree that definitional logic MUST precede any effort to empirically prove anything. Perceptions and presumptions are much too deceiving. If that is what you meant.

I have a new model, a new ontology: "Affectance Ontology" wherein the logic is undeniable (other than any mistakes I have made in wording). The reasoning presumes nothing of prior physics knowledge. It starts from scratch, assuming nothing. Then the empirical proof is more complicated but accomplished via emulation that demonstrates that particles will form in a certain way and size under specific conditions and behave exactly as science currently measures them to behave in all of the complex ways they do. It is a type of "post-proof".

I expect to be presenting here if I see that anyone here would actually be interested and willing to rationally scrutinize it for me.
Health (common) sense with a broad overview are the best substrate for intuition ...
Regarding your theory, I (personally) would appreciate your theses in concentrated, efficient form (due to my linguistic impotence). Details can be discussed separately :)

JSS
Posts: 232
Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2016 3:42 am

Re: Do you count dark matter and dark energy as part of the universe?

Post by JSS » Fri Feb 05, 2016 11:45 am

Cerveny wrote:Regarding your theory, I (personally) would appreciate your theses in concentrated, efficient form (due to my linguistic impotence). Details can be discussed separately :)
Not wanting to discuss it much on this thread (but since you asked), the following is something I wrote a few years ago as a "bare-bones" outline. You can think of it as "crib notes", very, very compressed. I need to sort through it again to see what wording I might need to change. It doesn't contain any of the due supporting logic to more greatly justify the statements being presented.
Although a great deal more detail can be explained, the Affectance Ontology for fundamental physics properties translated into contemporary physics terms are as follows;

1.) By declared definition, Existence is that which has affect.
  • a) Detectable Empiricism - We decide that something exists only when we detect that something is having affect. All of our senses function based on the affect that something else has upon them. We use equipment to increase our sensory ability, but still if nothing affects the equipment in any way, we declare that nothing was there.
    b) Common Usage - In reality, people are already using the word "exist" to mean this definition. They often never think about it, but in every case, the person really means that something having existence means that it has the potential to affect something; be seen, touched, smelled, or detected in some way even if not already detected.
    c) Support from Science - Science concluded long ago that in reality all existing things have at least some minuscule affect on all other things through chains of events.
    d) Rational Relevance - If something has truly no affect on anything whatsoever, we really don't care if it exists in any other sense. We can propose trillions of things that might exist but don't have affect. What would be the point? It would be a waste of mind time.
2.) An affect can only stem from the potential-to-affect, PtA (to alter or to change), from another separate or distinguished affect or affects (affects upon affects).
3.) Infinite homogeneity in a field of qualia cannot exist.
  • a) Absolute infinity cannot exist simply because by definition more can always be added.
    b) Absolute zero is merely one divided by absolute infinity and thus cannot exist either.
4.) Due to the above, in all adjacent locations, the potential for affect cannot be infinitely identical.
5.) Because the potential to affect is not identical anywhere, actualization of affect takes place everywhere.
6.) As affect occurs between adjacent potentials, waves of affect propagate spuriously in both direction and magnitude creating an ocean of affectance noise.
7.) When multiple propagating waves of affect act upon the same point, their affects add.
8.) The rate of adding affects cannot be absolutely instantaneous.
9.) Due to that limit to the rate of adding affects, when affects merge in such a way as to require more than an infinite change rate, a maximum change rate point, MCR point, forms and as the participating affects continue to attempt adding at the same location, any additional followup propagating affects must wait for time to pass. - "Inertia".
10.) A clump of affectance noise forms around an MCR point of inertia due to delays being extended into the immediate surrounding area and is supported only by affectance entering the volume at an equal rate as leaving it, forming a stable "Particle" – a “standing wave of noise".
11.) When the ambient affectance density surrounding a particle increases, the particle cannot disseminate at the same rate as it is accumulating, so the particle grows to a maximum anentropic size.
12.) If the ambient affectance noise is denser on one side of a particle than the opposite, the center of the clump of noise shifts toward the more dense affectance field. The "particle" moves or migrates – "Particle Migration or Motion".
13.) When the center of the noise shifts, the affects that were headed in the direction of motion remain within the particle longer than others.
14.) Because the affectance within the clump of noise has more affectance heading in the direction of the particle, the particle continues heading in that direction even if the surrounding affectance is returned to an even ambiance – “Momentum”.

15.) Because each particle is building affectance and thus creating a higher density field of noise surrounding it, particles migrate toward each other while gaining momentum – “Gravity”.
16.) When particles approach each other, they share their noise causing the smaller to become slightly larger.
17.) When the clumps of noise get too close, they unite such as to form a volume that will sustain the maximum amount of noise containing more than one center of congested noise – the "Strong Force".
18.) When the affectance noise that forms a particle happen to be more substantially of increasing potential rather than decreasing, a "Positive Particle" is formed, a "particle with positive Electric Potential".
19.) Positive noise delays additional positive noise, adding to the positive noise in the area while local negative noise cancels the positive delays resulting in negative noise speeding through the area rather than being delayed – "Particle Charge Stability".
20.) When a charged particle is in the field of noise that is associated with a close opposite charged particle, the noise within the particle that happens to be headed toward the opposing particle is partially relieved of its inertial constraint and thus moves more freely toward the opposing particle, as though slipping down hill.
21.) As the inner noise of a charged particle moves more freely in one direction, it inherently shifts the center of the noise toward the opposing particle while also establishing momentum in that same direction – "Charged Particle Attraction".
22.) When a strongly negative wave of affectance noise encounters a strongly positive wave of affect, their merging requires that each wave change at a greater than infinite rate creating a point of inertia, MCR, and a delay in propagation for both.
23.) During the delay caused by the merging of strong opposite polarity, the particles associated with the waves continue to absorb noise of their own polarity and thus remain stable charged particles that continue to deliver strong waves.
24.) When a small negative particle approaches a larger positive particle, the smaller particle grows asymmetrically with its greater increasing noise closer to the larger positive particle.
25.) The stronger negative waves encountering the larger particle's large positive waves create many incidences of points of inertia that delay the entire smaller negative particle to the point of not allowing it to get closer to the positive before veering off to a side, orbiting the larger positive particle - "Electron Orbitals".
26.) As a wave of affect enters a region of greater noise, getting delayed more, the trailing edge of the wave begins to catch up to the leading edge compressing the entire wave -"Magnetic Wave".
27.) A compressed wave stores its energy potential within a smaller volume yielding a greater affect within the same propagating time frame as a non-compressed wave.
28.) Compressed waves passing into a charged particle have greater affect upon a particle causing the particle to shift more greatly into the oncoming wave – "Magnetic Induction".
29.) A circling charged particle creates a spiraling compressed ("magnetic") wave extending outward from the center of the circle - "Magnetic Field".
30.) The spiraling compression wave has a clockwise spiral above the flat plane of circulation and a counterclockwise spiral below.
31.) If two circling charged particles are close by, parallel, and circling in the same direction, the spirals from each causes the other to veer its orbit closer to the other – "Magnetic Attraction".
32.) If two circling charged particles are close by, parallel, and circling in opposite directions, they each cause the other to veer its orbit away from the other – "Magnetic Repulsion".
33.) Because the spirals extending from the circling charges have the opposite direction of spiral above from below, another circling charged particle will experience magnetic attraction on one side or magnetic repulsion on the other side – "North and South Magnetic Polarity".
Image
Image
Image

User avatar
Cerveny
Posts: 583
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 9:35 pm
Location: Czech Republic
Contact:

Re: Do you count dark matter and dark energy as part of the universe?

Post by Cerveny » Fri Feb 05, 2016 4:59 pm

Interesting. I have some difficulties with a rich English, but I believe I understand your efforts. Maybe you should put emphasis on the aims and the wanted goals of your point of view. I am personally attracted by macro-relations: the structure of physical space and its relationship to the elementary particles, the Time, determinism, the Future, lack of antimatter, the Life ...

JSS
Posts: 232
Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2016 3:42 am

Re: Do you count dark matter and dark energy as part of the universe?

Post by JSS » Fri Feb 05, 2016 5:59 pm

Cerveny wrote:Interesting. I have some difficulties with a rich English, but I believe I understand your efforts. Maybe you should put emphasis on the aims and the wanted goals of your point of view. I am personally attracted by macro-relations: the structure of physical space and its relationship to the elementary particles, the Time, determinism, the Future, lack of antimatter, the Life ...
Well, that is off topic for this thread, but what is your first language? Would German be better?

User avatar
Cerveny
Posts: 583
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 9:35 pm
Location: Czech Republic
Contact:

Re: Do you count dark matter and dark energy as part of the universe?

Post by Cerveny » Fri Feb 05, 2016 7:38 pm

JSS wrote:
Cerveny wrote:Interesting. I have some difficulties with a rich English, but I believe I understand your efforts. Maybe you should put emphasis on the aims and the wanted goals of your point of view. I am personally attracted by macro-relations: the structure of physical space and its relationship to the elementary particles, the Time, determinism, the Future, lack of antimatter, the Life ...
Well, that is off topic for this thread, but what is your first language? Would German be better?
It is not difficult to let Google translate your text into Czech language, but I would like to know what problem of physics should be solved by your explanations / thesis... As I "work" on macro level, I am interesting mainly about your proposed ouputs, results...
.
.
I suffer by slight dyslexia, so I have had always language problems :( luckily, basic English is sufficient for my job :)

JSS
Posts: 232
Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2016 3:42 am

Re: Do you count dark matter and dark energy as part of the universe?

Post by JSS » Fri Feb 05, 2016 8:15 pm

Cerveny wrote: It is not difficult to let Google translate your text into Czech language, but I would like to know what problem of physics should be solved by your explanations / thesis... As I "work" on macro level, I am interesting mainly about your proposed ouputs, results...
.
.
I suffer by slight dyslexia, so I have had always language problems :( luckily, basic English is sufficient for my job :)
Well, if this was the 1970's, I might have been able to handle Czech, but certainly not anymore.

The principles of Affectance Ontology also directly apply to psychology, sociology, and economics and indirectly to everything. It is a very huge field of study.

What problem in physics would be solved? Well .. good question. Just about every puzzle they currently have can be resolved very quickly (such as Young's Double-slit issue or the Mach-Zehnder phenomenon). The accuracy of what they currently measure can be increased. But perhaps the most significant issue is the one of economy of research. By using a metaspace emulation program in a relatively small computer, real particle accelerators and colliders don't have to be used other than to verify any remaining doubts. Shortly they would not be needed at all. And chemistry and psychology experiments can be validly conducted without chemicals or human subjects.

Image

And in addition, one need not depend upon what the media reports that far distant physicists are supposed to have claimed. With a computer, one can try out theories concerning physics for themselves on even the subatomic level with extreme accuracy. People no longer have to take the word of others regarding very many issues.

In the other fields the level of common understanding within the population can be increased substantially even if not raised to a very high level. That allows for much, much more harmony between science, people, organizations, and governments.

surreptitious57
Posts: 4028
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: Do you count dark matter and dark energy as part of the universe?

Post by surreptitious57 » Sun Feb 14, 2016 7:25 am

Given that dark matter and dark energy between them account for ninety six per
cent of the observable universe they absolutely should be considered a part of it

Kristofer
Posts: 14
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2016 3:59 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Do you count dark matter and dark energy as part of the universe?

Post by Kristofer » Thu Nov 10, 2016 4:11 pm

Whatever it is, its 95% of the universe so yeah.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests