Scientists think they found proof of a parallel universe

[The Sage of Main Street]

A Totalitarian Needs His Followers to Reject Their Own Thoughts

There is a fourth spatial dimension. That's where the electron goes during the quantum leap before returning to a different shell of the atom. The maximum velocity in 4D is c^2, the equivalent of a light-year leap in three minutes.

Nothing is irrational, but the Quantum Quacks want to enforce a mind-numbing irrationality, much like Heisenberg's Nazi politics. In a logical reality, his Uncertainty Principle merely means that apparent randomness is controlled by factors outside of 3D.

Entanglement, the way these literally absent-minded professors want us to look at it, is impossible. Instead of their fantasy of two different particles, with one affected by what happens to the other but doesn't happen to itself, there is only one particle going back and forth through the fourth dimension.

For the analysis of quantum long range effects and electron steady state eigenfunction switching, I would like to add the extra dimension(s) in the time argument only, because otherwise it easily breaks the equations of the M theory.

Plus Heisenberg was not all that b

Quantum Quacks

Time is not a dimension; it has no extension. The fourth spatial dimension had been theorized earlier than postclassical physics, but it had degenerated into speculations about superstition and magic. That intimidated Einstein and others from going there, so they made up timespace solely in order to not be associated with a perverted theory. No one is experiencing the past or the future; everything is instantaneous.

 

[anotherlife]

Also, the time model, used in each of these theories, doesn't have to be linear. In fact, relativistic quantum electrodynamics can be written such that time stops being an argument, and everything becomes just a simultaneous collection of infinite static universes.



Here is another problem too. Mathematically, there is no need to find anything already existing in the center of a black hole, and it is against the grain of known physics, to expect wormholes. It is however intuitive, that such a singularity simply creates a new universe, as hinted in the video by the formation of new bubbles.

So the other end of a black hole is a white source, in fact our universe can be the result of such a white source. The Heisenberg uncertainty principle also demands, that the black hole dissipates. Has our Big Bang happened as a consequence of a white hole reaching a critical size?

All Is Lava

A wormhole is created during fission. It also occurs in Black Holes, which are more like volcanos erupting back into 4D but not creating a new universe. Like the Big Bang, a Black Hole is an impossible concentration of matter; there is no singularity. The Big Bang was a reverse eruption that let in all 3D matter, energy, light, and space itself. So that eruption from 4D did create a new universe, the one we live in.

I must disagree. I find no mathematical evidence or physical measurement or necessity that black holes should result in wormholes. By the way, the M theory requires 11D. And if you introduce the idea of eruptions, then you also have to take on the burden of the energy conservation principle, and perimetric and initial conditions. So far we have successfully avoided them in the consideration of the singularity.

 

[anotherlife]

A Totalitarian Needs His Followers to Reject Their Own Thoughts

There is a fourth spatial dimension. That's where the electron goes during the quantum leap before returning to a different shell of the atom. The maximum velocity in 4D is c^2, the equivalent of a light-year leap in three minutes.

Nothing is irrational, but the Quantum Quacks want to enforce a mind-numbing irrationality, much like Heisenberg's Nazi politics. In a logical reality, his Uncertainty Principle merely means that apparent randomness is controlled by factors outside of 3D.

Entanglement, the way these literally absent-minded professors want us to look at it, is impossible. Instead of their fantasy of two different particles, with one affected by what happens to the other but doesn't happen to itself, there is only one particle going back and forth through the fourth dimension.

For the analysis of quantum long range effects and electron steady state eigenfunction switching, I would like to add the extra dimension(s) in the time argument only, because otherwise it easily breaks the equations of the M theory.

Plus Heisenberg was not all that b

Quantum Quacks

Time is not a dimension; it has no extension. The fourth spatial dimension had been theorized earlier than postclassical physics, but it had degenerated into speculations about superstition and magic. That intimidated Einstein and others from going there, so they made up timespace solely in order to not be associated with a perverted theory. No one is experiencing the past or the future; everything is instantaneous.

It is a question of formulation. We are looking for analytical models that mechanically describe the quantum mechanical processes, high energy processes, and long range effects, relativistically. There IS merit, as well as physical meaning, in defining time in a nonlinear fashion, such as for example as a complex periodic function of event count. Coincidence measurements can then be constructed accordingly.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Also, the time model, used in each of these theories, doesn't have to be linear. In fact, relativistic quantum electrodynamics can be written such that time stops being an argument, and everything becomes just a simultaneous collection of infinite static universes.



Here is another problem too. Mathematically, there is no need to find anything already existing in the center of a black hole, and it is against the grain of known physics, to expect wormholes. It is however intuitive, that such a singularity simply creates a new universe, as hinted in the video by the formation of new bubbles.

So the other end of a black hole is a white source, in fact our universe can be the result of such a white source. The Heisenberg uncertainty principle also demands, that the black hole dissipates. Has our Big Bang happened as a consequence of a white hole reaching a critical size?

All Is Lava

A wormhole is created during fission. It also occurs in Black Holes, which are more like volcanos erupting back into 4D but not creating a new universe. Like the Big Bang, a Black Hole is an impossible concentration of matter; there is no singularity. The Big Bang was a reverse eruption that let in all 3D matter, energy, light, and space itself. So that eruption from 4D did create a new universe, the one we live in.

I must disagree. I find no mathematical evidence or physical measurement or necessity that black holes should result in wormholes. By the way, the M theory requires 11D. And if you introduce the idea of eruptions, then you also have to take on the burden of the energy conservation principle, and perimetric and initial conditions. So far we have successfully avoided them in the consideration of the singularity.

Strumming a Harp While Sitting on a Cloud

It is impossible for a singularity to exist. If you start by assuming that such a concentration of matter is a foundational fact, you can build a logical structure on it. But it all falls apart, just like astrology, another elaborate system based on an absurdity.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

A Totalitarian Needs His Followers to Reject Their Own Thoughts

There is a fourth spatial dimension. That's where the electron goes during the quantum leap before returning to a different shell of the atom. The maximum velocity in 4D is c^2, the equivalent of a light-year leap in three minutes.

Nothing is irrational, but the Quantum Quacks want to enforce a mind-numbing irrationality, much like Heisenberg's Nazi politics. In a logical reality, his Uncertainty Principle merely means that apparent randomness is controlled by factors outside of 3D.

Entanglement, the way these literally absent-minded professors want us to look at it, is impossible. Instead of their fantasy of two different particles, with one affected by what happens to the other but doesn't happen to itself, there is only one particle going back and forth through the fourth dimension.

For the analysis of quantum long range effects and electron steady state eigenfunction switching, I would like to add the extra dimension(s) in the time argument only, because otherwise it easily breaks the equations of the M theory.

Plus Heisenberg was not all that b

Quantum Quacks

Time is not a dimension; it has no extension. The fourth spatial dimension had been theorized earlier than postclassical physics, but it had degenerated into speculations about superstition and magic. That intimidated Einstein and others from going there, so they made up timespace solely in order to not be associated with a perverted theory. No one is experiencing the past or the future; everything is instantaneous.

It is a question of formulation. We are looking for analytical models that mechanically describe the quantum mechanical processes, high energy processes, and long range effects, relativistically. There IS merit, as well as physical meaning, in defining time in a nonlinear fashion, such as for example as a complex periodic function of event count. Coincidence measurements can then be constructed accordingly.

John Nash Was Warned Against Narrow-Minded Postclassical Dictators

All these fudged and proudly weird theories pushed by bossy postmodern physicists are similar to the epicycles used to preserve the Inquisition Church's geocentric theory after discovering more about planetary movements. As usual, those who preach the New Science condemn the old way of explaining things as preachy.. After over a century of this, those who think they are still rebels don't allow anyone to rebel against them. They use all the dishonest rhetorical tricks. Someone could say that angels carry out gravity, then drop something and say that's proof that the angels carried it down or it wouldn't have dropped.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Composite; NASA
Originally Published By:

NASA detects huge Earth ‘bubble’




Scientists believe they may have discovered evidence of a parallel universe that crashed into our own in a galactic impact mirroring a car crash.

Since 2004, when it was first spotted by NASA, scientists have been baffled by the discovery an unusually cold region of space which is 1.8 billion light years across and colder than its surroundings.

It was thought the region might have been a trick of light or it was colder because it had 10,000 less galaxies than other areas of the same size.

Now a new study has stumbled upon an incredible possibility, that the ‘Cold Spot’ cannot be explained as a void and was not due to “line-of-sight” effects.

Instead, researchers at Durham University believe it could be the first evidence of the “multiverse.”

They believe a parallel universe could have smashed into ours affecting it in a way similar to a multiple vehicle pileup.

That impact was so incredible, according to this research, that it pushed energy out of a huge region of space resulting in the Cold Spot.

“Perhaps the most exciting explanation is that the Cold Spot was caused by a collision between our universe and another bubble universe, believe it or not,” said Professor Tom Shanks, an astronomer at Durham University and a co-author of the study.

“If further, more detailed, analysis proves this to be the case then the Cold Spot might be taken as the first evidence for the multiverse.”

“I remember some scientists suggesting that there could be detectable effects on the galaxy distribution after this ‘cosmic shunt’ of two universes colliding.

“Basically colliding universes could leave a slightly anisotropic galaxy distribution in our own universe — a bit like a pileup on the motorway.

“So we can look for this to test how seriously to take these ideas.”

According to The Guardian, “each universe carries its own different version of reality.”

“There will be one where you wrote this column and I read it, even a really weird one in which Donald Trump uses Twitter to spread nothing but amusing cat videos,” Stuart Clark wrote in the publication.

The Cold Spot occurred at the formation of the universe more than 13 billion years ago.


http://nypost.com/2017/05/18/scientists-think-they-found-proof-of-a-parallel-universe/

Scientists Believe NASA's Cold Spot Is Proof Of A Parallel Universe [VIDEO]

Hey dalia , you see this in France?








.

 

[fncceo]

It's been rumored the still have dirt roads and outhouses.

Liberal Utopia

 

[anotherlife]

Also, the time model, used in each of these theories, doesn't have to be linear. In fact, relativistic quantum electrodynamics can be written such that time stops being an argument, and everything becomes just a simultaneous collection of infinite static universes.



Here is another problem too. Mathematically, there is no need to find anything already existing in the center of a black hole, and it is against the grain of known physics, to expect wormholes. It is however intuitive, that such a singularity simply creates a new universe, as hinted in the video by the formation of new bubbles.

So the other end of a black hole is a white source, in fact our universe can be the result of such a white source. The Heisenberg uncertainty principle also demands, that the black hole dissipates. Has our Big Bang happened as a consequence of a white hole reaching a critical size?

All Is Lava

A wormhole is created during fission. It also occurs in Black Holes, which are more like volcanos erupting back into 4D but not creating a new universe. Like the Big Bang, a Black Hole is an impossible concentration of matter; there is no singularity. The Big Bang was a reverse eruption that let in all 3D matter, energy, light, and space itself. So that eruption from 4D did create a new universe, the one we live in.

I must disagree. I find no mathematical evidence or physical measurement or necessity that black holes should result in wormholes. By the way, the M theory requires 11D. And if you introduce the idea of eruptions, then you also have to take on the burden of the energy conservation principle, and perimetric and initial conditions. So far we have successfully avoided them in the consideration of the singularity.

Strumming a Harp While Sitting on a Cloud

It is impossible for a singularity to exist. If you start by assuming that such a concentration of matter is a foundational fact, you can build a logical structure on it. But it all falls apart, just like astrology, another elaborate system based on an absurdity.

It is a mathematical fact, that the speed of light is a singularity in generalized relativity. It's square is in the denominator of the relativistic factor, and dividing with zero is a singularity. Div by sqrt(1-v2/c2) where v is the velocity and c is the speed of light.

 

[anotherlife]

A Totalitarian Needs His Followers to Reject Their Own Thoughts

There is a fourth spatial dimension. That's where the electron goes during the quantum leap before returning to a different shell of the atom. The maximum velocity in 4D is c^2, the equivalent of a light-year leap in three minutes.

Nothing is irrational, but the Quantum Quacks want to enforce a mind-numbing irrationality, much like Heisenberg's Nazi politics. In a logical reality, his Uncertainty Principle merely means that apparent randomness is controlled by factors outside of 3D.

Entanglement, the way these literally absent-minded professors want us to look at it, is impossible. Instead of their fantasy of two different particles, with one affected by what happens to the other but doesn't happen to itself, there is only one particle going back and forth through the fourth dimension.

For the analysis of quantum long range effects and electron steady state eigenfunction switching, I would like to add the extra dimension(s) in the time argument only, because otherwise it easily breaks the equations of the M theory.

Plus Heisenberg was not all that b

Quantum Quacks

Time is not a dimension; it has no extension. The fourth spatial dimension had been theorized earlier than postclassical physics, but it had degenerated into speculations about superstition and magic. That intimidated Einstein and others from going there, so they made up timespace solely in order to not be associated with a perverted theory. No one is experiencing the past or the future; everything is instantaneous.

It is a question of formulation. We are looking for analytical models that mechanically describe the quantum mechanical processes, high energy processes, and long range effects, relativistically. There IS merit, as well as physical meaning, in defining time in a nonlinear fashion, such as for example as a complex periodic function of event count. Coincidence measurements can then be constructed accordingly.

John Nash Was Warned Against Narrow-Minded Postclassical Dictators

All these fudged and proudly weird theories pushed by bossy postmodern physicists are similar to the epicycles used to preserve the Inquisition Church's geocentric theory after discovering more about planetary movements. As usual, those who preach the New Science condemn the old way of explaining things as preachy.. After over a century of this, those who think they are still rebels don't allow anyone to rebel against them. They use all the dishonest rhetorical tricks. Someone could say that angels carry out gravity, then drop something and say that's proof that the angels carried it down or it wouldn't have dropped.

You still need to find reproducible scientific answers.

 

[SixFoot]

A Totalitarian Needs His Followers to Reject Their Own Thoughts

There is a fourth spatial dimension. That's where the electron goes during the quantum leap before returning to a different shell of the atom. The maximum velocity in 4D is c^2, the equivalent of a light-year leap in three minutes.

Nothing is irrational, but the Quantum Quacks want to enforce a mind-numbing irrationality, much like Heisenberg's Nazi politics. In a logical reality, his Uncertainty Principle merely means that apparent randomness is controlled by factors outside of 3D.

Entanglement, the way these literally absent-minded professors want us to look at it, is impossible. Instead of their fantasy of two different particles, with one affected by what happens to the other but doesn't happen to itself, there is only one particle going back and forth through the fourth dimension.

For the analysis of quantum long range effects and electron steady state eigenfunction switching, I would like to add the extra dimension(s) in the time argument only, because otherwise it easily breaks the equations of the M theory.

Plus Heisenberg was not all that b

Quantum Quacks

Time is not a dimension; it has no extension. The fourth spatial dimension had been theorized earlier than postclassical physics, but it had degenerated into speculations about superstition and magic. That intimidated Einstein and others from going there, so they made up timespace solely in order to not be associated with a perverted theory. No one is experiencing the past or the future; everything is instantaneous.

It is a question of formulation. We are looking for analytical models that mechanically describe the quantum mechanical processes, high energy processes, and long range effects, relativistically. There IS merit, as well as physical meaning, in defining time in a nonlinear fashion, such as for example as a complex periodic function of event count. Coincidence measurements can then be constructed accordingly.

John Nash Was Warned Against Narrow-Minded Postclassical Dictators

All these fudged and proudly weird theories pushed by bossy postmodern physicists are similar to the epicycles used to preserve the Inquisition Church's geocentric theory after discovering more about planetary movements. As usual, those who preach the New Science condemn the old way of explaining things as preachy.. After over a century of this, those who think they are still rebels don't allow anyone to rebel against them. They use all the dishonest rhetorical tricks. Someone could say that angels carry out gravity, then drop something and say that's proof that the angels carried it down or it wouldn't have dropped.

You still need to find reproducible scientific answers.

I'd love to hear your thoughts on Gravitons and M theory in general.

 

[anotherlife]

For the analysis of quantum long range effects and electron steady state eigenfunction switching, I would like to add the extra dimension(s) in the time argument only, because otherwise it easily breaks the equations of the M theory.

Plus Heisenberg was not all that b

Quantum Quacks

Time is not a dimension; it has no extension. The fourth spatial dimension had been theorized earlier than postclassical physics, but it had degenerated into speculations about superstition and magic. That intimidated Einstein and others from going there, so they made up timespace solely in order to not be associated with a perverted theory. No one is experiencing the past or the future; everything is instantaneous.

It is a question of formulation. We are looking for analytical models that mechanically describe the quantum mechanical processes, high energy processes, and long range effects, relativistically. There IS merit, as well as physical meaning, in defining time in a nonlinear fashion, such as for example as a complex periodic function of event count. Coincidence measurements can then be constructed accordingly.

John Nash Was Warned Against Narrow-Minded Postclassical Dictators

All these fudged and proudly weird theories pushed by bossy postmodern physicists are similar to the epicycles used to preserve the Inquisition Church's geocentric theory after discovering more about planetary movements. As usual, those who preach the New Science condemn the old way of explaining things as preachy.. After over a century of this, those who think they are still rebels don't allow anyone to rebel against them. They use all the dishonest rhetorical tricks. Someone could say that angels carry out gravity, then drop something and say that's proof that the angels carried it down or it wouldn't have dropped.

You still need to find reproducible scientific answers.

I'd love to hear your thoughts on Gravitons and M theory in general.

I think I wrote in some other thread here some time ago, that every interaction can be represented as co-resonance, as they require the energy conservation principle. Since gravity can be modeled this way too, the particle based treatment is valid. This gels well with the M theory, since that itself is a resonance based model. Too bad, this doesn't help the more interesting question which is the canonical Newtonian formulation of gravity.

 

[SixFoot]

Quantum Quacks

Time is not a dimension; it has no extension. The fourth spatial dimension had been theorized earlier than postclassical physics, but it had degenerated into speculations about superstition and magic. That intimidated Einstein and others from going there, so they made up timespace solely in order to not be associated with a perverted theory. No one is experiencing the past or the future; everything is instantaneous.

It is a question of formulation. We are looking for analytical models that mechanically describe the quantum mechanical processes, high energy processes, and long range effects, relativistically. There IS merit, as well as physical meaning, in defining time in a nonlinear fashion, such as for example as a complex periodic function of event count. Coincidence measurements can then be constructed accordingly.

John Nash Was Warned Against Narrow-Minded Postclassical Dictators

All these fudged and proudly weird theories pushed by bossy postmodern physicists are similar to the epicycles used to preserve the Inquisition Church's geocentric theory after discovering more about planetary movements. As usual, those who preach the New Science condemn the old way of explaining things as preachy.. After over a century of this, those who think they are still rebels don't allow anyone to rebel against them. They use all the dishonest rhetorical tricks. Someone could say that angels carry out gravity, then drop something and say that's proof that the angels carried it down or it wouldn't have dropped.

You still need to find reproducible scientific answers.

I'd love to hear your thoughts on Gravitons and M theory in general.

I think I wrote in some other thread here some time ago, that every interaction can be represented as co-resonance, as they require the energy conservation principle. Since gravity can be modeled this way too, the particle based treatment is valid. This gels well with the M theory, since that itself is a resonance based model. Too bad, this doesn't help the more interesting question which is the canonical Newtonian formulation of gravity.

Well, I tell ya hwhat, the Linac 4 accelerator is gonna be online at CERN about a year after I graduate (been thinking more and more about changing my major to either physics or astronomy), and it's gonna start putting String/M theory to the test.

I'm looking forward to many-many productive conversations about Existence with you people who have the rare ability to put aside petty differences and speak only on the data.

 

[anotherlife]

It is a question of formulation. We are looking for analytical models that mechanically describe the quantum mechanical processes, high energy processes, and long range effects, relativistically. There IS merit, as well as physical meaning, in defining time in a nonlinear fashion, such as for example as a complex periodic function of event count. Coincidence measurements can then be constructed accordingly.

John Nash Was Warned Against Narrow-Minded Postclassical Dictators

All these fudged and proudly weird theories pushed by bossy postmodern physicists are similar to the epicycles used to preserve the Inquisition Church's geocentric theory after discovering more about planetary movements. As usual, those who preach the New Science condemn the old way of explaining things as preachy.. After over a century of this, those who think they are still rebels don't allow anyone to rebel against them. They use all the dishonest rhetorical tricks. Someone could say that angels carry out gravity, then drop something and say that's proof that the angels carried it down or it wouldn't have dropped.

You still need to find reproducible scientific answers.

I'd love to hear your thoughts on Gravitons and M theory in general.

I think I wrote in some other thread here some time ago, that every interaction can be represented as co-resonance, as they require the energy conservation principle. Since gravity can be modeled this way too, the particle based treatment is valid. This gels well with the M theory, since that itself is a resonance based model. Too bad, this doesn't help the more interesting question which is the canonical Newtonian formulation of gravity.

Well, I tell ya hwhat, the Linac 4 accelerator is gonna be online at CERN about a year after I graduate (been thinking more and more about changing my major to either physics or astronomy), and it's gonna start putting String/M theory to the test.

I'm looking forward to many-many productive conversations about Existence with you people who have the rare ability to put aside petty differences and speak only on the data.

Yes, without generating and revisiting the data, it is very easy to go astray. And I hope for the linac4 too. That is gonna be interesting.

 

[SixFoot]

John Nash Was Warned Against Narrow-Minded Postclassical Dictators

All these fudged and proudly weird theories pushed by bossy postmodern physicists are similar to the epicycles used to preserve the Inquisition Church's geocentric theory after discovering more about planetary movements. As usual, those who preach the New Science condemn the old way of explaining things as preachy.. After over a century of this, those who think they are still rebels don't allow anyone to rebel against them. They use all the dishonest rhetorical tricks. Someone could say that angels carry out gravity, then drop something and say that's proof that the angels carried it down or it wouldn't have dropped.

You still need to find reproducible scientific answers.

I'd love to hear your thoughts on Gravitons and M theory in general.

I think I wrote in some other thread here some time ago, that every interaction can be represented as co-resonance, as they require the energy conservation principle. Since gravity can be modeled this way too, the particle based treatment is valid. This gels well with the M theory, since that itself is a resonance based model. Too bad, this doesn't help the more interesting question which is the canonical Newtonian formulation of gravity.

Well, I tell ya hwhat, the Linac 4 accelerator is gonna be online at CERN about a year after I graduate (been thinking more and more about changing my major to either physics or astronomy), and it's gonna start putting String/M theory to the test.

I'm looking forward to many-many productive conversations about Existence with you people who have the rare ability to put aside petty differences and speak only on the data.

Yes, without generating and revisiting the data, it is very easy to go astray. And I hope for the linac4 too. That is gonna be interesting.

As I understand the theory in terms of multiple dimensions, that opens the door directly to the many world theory and the Mandela Effect, correct?

 

[anotherlife]

You still need to find reproducible scientific answers.

I'd love to hear your thoughts on Gravitons and M theory in general.

I think I wrote in some other thread here some time ago, that every interaction can be represented as co-resonance, as they require the energy conservation principle. Since gravity can be modeled this way too, the particle based treatment is valid. This gels well with the M theory, since that itself is a resonance based model. Too bad, this doesn't help the more interesting question which is the canonical Newtonian formulation of gravity.

Well, I tell ya hwhat, the Linac 4 accelerator is gonna be online at CERN about a year after I graduate (been thinking more and more about changing my major to either physics or astronomy), and it's gonna start putting String/M theory to the test.

I'm looking forward to many-many productive conversations about Existence with you people who have the rare ability to put aside petty differences and speak only on the data.

Yes, without generating and revisiting the data, it is very easy to go astray. And I hope for the linac4 too. That is gonna be interesting.

As I understand the theory in terms of multiple dimensions, that opens the door directly to the many world theory and the Mandela Effect, correct?

I hope such an effect is possible. This is because this gives opportunities to fix things, rather than just compensating for them after the fact.

I guess a high energy physics experiment would be set up such, that "simultaneous" captures of traces of collisions are recorded. Then we look for predictable differences between the traces, excluding equipment imbalance of course. If time can be modeled as simultaneous alternative versions of the pre experiment universe, then these differences will suggest a nonlinear and multi dimensional nature of time itself. I think it is possible to obtain photographic evidence of things that "have never" existed in anyone's mind. So I guess the Mandela effect, is also possible, making people's memories the photographic evidence. A political or natural power that can plan and execute such events is formidable, and most likely responsible for ww1-2 as well.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

"any world that I am welcome to ,is better than the one I come from"

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

It's been rumored the still have dirt roads and outhouses.

Liberal Utopia

Decade After Decadent Decade, Generation After Degenerate Generation

That's like the hippie commune that got wiped out in the movie Joe, starring Peter Boyle and Susan Sarandon. Notice that she played a rich girl. That unAmerican class started and led all this New Age social poison. We are told, however, that it was freaks or "beautiful people" from all different classes. The media's presentation of reality is like a millionaire showing us pictures of his children.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Also, the time model, used in each of these theories, doesn't have to be linear. In fact, relativistic quantum electrodynamics can be written such that time stops being an argument, and everything becomes just a simultaneous collection of infinite static universes.



Here is another problem too. Mathematically, there is no need to find anything already existing in the center of a black hole, and it is against the grain of known physics, to expect wormholes. It is however intuitive, that such a singularity simply creates a new universe, as hinted in the video by the formation of new bubbles.

So the other end of a black hole is a white source, in fact our universe can be the result of such a white source. The Heisenberg uncertainty principle also demands, that the black hole dissipates. Has our Big Bang happened as a consequence of a white hole reaching a critical size?

All Is Lava

A wormhole is created during fission. It also occurs in Black Holes, which are more like volcanos erupting back into 4D but not creating a new universe. Like the Big Bang, a Black Hole is an impossible concentration of matter; there is no singularity. The Big Bang was a reverse eruption that let in all 3D matter, energy, light, and space itself. So that eruption from 4D did create a new universe, the one we live in.

I must disagree. I find no mathematical evidence or physical measurement or necessity that black holes should result in wormholes. By the way, the M theory requires 11D. And if you introduce the idea of eruptions, then you also have to take on the burden of the energy conservation principle, and perimetric and initial conditions. So far we have successfully avoided them in the consideration of the singularity.

Strumming a Harp While Sitting on a Cloud

It is impossible for a singularity to exist. If you start by assuming that such a concentration of matter is a foundational fact, you can build a logical structure on it. But it all falls apart, just like astrology, another elaborate system based on an absurdity.

It is a mathematical fact, that the speed of light is a singularity in generalized relativity. It's square is in the denominator of the relativistic factor, and dividing with zero is a singularity. Div by sqrt(1-v2/c2) where v is the velocity and c is the speed of light.

Why Not Do the Math Based on a Different Foundation?

That sounds no better or worse than my interpretation, which is that fission opens up an entryway, or even a speedway through 3D space, from the fourth dimension, where c^2 is the maximum velocity. So E = mc^2 is a formula for a collision. The chain reaction slows down after each collision, but the first one happens at the speed of one of our light-years in three minutes.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

A Totalitarian Needs His Followers to Reject Their Own Thoughts

There is a fourth spatial dimension. That's where the electron goes during the quantum leap before returning to a different shell of the atom. The maximum velocity in 4D is c^2, the equivalent of a light-year leap in three minutes.

Nothing is irrational, but the Quantum Quacks want to enforce a mind-numbing irrationality, much like Heisenberg's Nazi politics. In a logical reality, his Uncertainty Principle merely means that apparent randomness is controlled by factors outside of 3D.

Entanglement, the way these literally absent-minded professors want us to look at it, is impossible. Instead of their fantasy of two different particles, with one affected by what happens to the other but doesn't happen to itself, there is only one particle going back and forth through the fourth dimension.

For the analysis of quantum long range effects and electron steady state eigenfunction switching, I would like to add the extra dimension(s) in the time argument only, because otherwise it easily breaks the equations of the M theory.

Plus Heisenberg was not all that b

Quantum Quacks

Time is not a dimension; it has no extension. The fourth spatial dimension had been theorized earlier than postclassical physics, but it had degenerated into speculations about superstition and magic. That intimidated Einstein and others from going there, so they made up timespace solely in order to not be associated with a perverted theory. No one is experiencing the past or the future; everything is instantaneous.

It is a question of formulation. We are looking for analytical models that mechanically describe the quantum mechanical processes, high energy processes, and long range effects, relativistically. There IS merit, as well as physical meaning, in defining time in a nonlinear fashion, such as for example as a complex periodic function of event count. Coincidence measurements can then be constructed accordingly.

John Nash Was Warned Against Narrow-Minded Postclassical Dictators

All these fudged and proudly weird theories pushed by bossy postmodern physicists are similar to the epicycles used to preserve the Inquisition Church's geocentric theory after discovering more about planetary movements. As usual, those who preach the New Science condemn the old way of explaining things as preachy.. After over a century of this, those who think they are still rebels don't allow anyone to rebel against them. They use all the dishonest rhetorical tricks. Someone could say that angels carry out gravity, then drop something and say that's proof that the angels carried it down or it wouldn't have dropped.

You still need to find reproducible scientific answers.

Modern Science Is a Superstition

It's about explaining the causes of phenomena that have already been reproduced. You're confusing cause and effect. In fact, another glaring error of postclassical physics is that they claim an effect can happen before what causes it.

My explanations are more rational than what you get from the absent-minded professors. If a singularity fits a theory and its selective math, then that theory is wrong. Likewise, the quantum leap (displacement without motion) and entanglement (effect outside effective range) are irrational without a movement outside 3D and back into it from 4D.

 

[anotherlife]

For the analysis of quantum long range effects and electron steady state eigenfunction switching, I would like to add the extra dimension(s) in the time argument only, because otherwise it easily breaks the equations of the M theory.

Plus Heisenberg was not all that b

Quantum Quacks

Time is not a dimension; it has no extension. The fourth spatial dimension had been theorized earlier than postclassical physics, but it had degenerated into speculations about superstition and magic. That intimidated Einstein and others from going there, so they made up timespace solely in order to not be associated with a perverted theory. No one is experiencing the past or the future; everything is instantaneous.

It is a question of formulation. We are looking for analytical models that mechanically describe the quantum mechanical processes, high energy processes, and long range effects, relativistically. There IS merit, as well as physical meaning, in defining time in a nonlinear fashion, such as for example as a complex periodic function of event count. Coincidence measurements can then be constructed accordingly.

John Nash Was Warned Against Narrow-Minded Postclassical Dictators

All these fudged and proudly weird theories pushed by bossy postmodern physicists are similar to the epicycles used to preserve the Inquisition Church's geocentric theory after discovering more about planetary movements. As usual, those who preach the New Science condemn the old way of explaining things as preachy.. After over a century of this, those who think they are still rebels don't allow anyone to rebel against them. They use all the dishonest rhetorical tricks. Someone could say that angels carry out gravity, then drop something and say that's proof that the angels carried it down or it wouldn't have dropped.

You still need to find reproducible scientific answers.

Modern Science Is a Superstition

It's about explaining the causes of phenomena that have already been reproduced. You're confusing cause and effect. In fact, another glaring error of postclassical physics is that they claim an effect can happen before what causes it.

My explanations are more rational than what you get from the absent-minded professors. If a singularity fits a theory and its selective math, then that theory is wrong. Likewise, the quantum leap (displacement without motion) and entanglement (effect outside effective range) are irrational without a movement outside 3D and back into it from 4D.

Then here is a kicker for you. Even the classical electromagnetic wave equations of Maxwell, provide wave solutions in both positive AND negative time. What does that do to your cause before effect problem? Imagine, the negative wave comes from the future and travels towards the past.