[Robert]

Focused Review & Study - Topic #2

In an effort to give more attention and critical analysis to Joseph's article I have re-created it here, as a Focused Review & Study Forum, for discussion and comment by the ToeQuest community. Greater effort will be made to bring other member's contributions to these forums to attract more intense scrutiny by the community.

Below is a link to the study material for this forum. Click on the link and a separate browser window will open that contains Joseph's article with the paragraphs number in red. You should use this as reference only. Read the article and as you come across paragraphs that you either don't understand, disagree with, or think you can add to, you should open a new thread for discussion.

Study Material: On The Development of a Theory of The Universe

All discussions should be related to the study material. When you start a thread you may make general comments about the material but if you go into specifics you must include a paragraph reference so others can refer to the same paragraph and it should appear near the top of your starting post. If you post to an existing thread, try and keep the discussion on the original topic.

Regards,
--Robert

[dleviwing]

Sorry Robert but I do not see anything that warrants a peer review of Joseph’s essay. He claims originality to his ideas when in fact he just has not done the research or study to know they have been proposed and considered before. A study of physics would reduce his list of questions significantly.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Hi all, I should like to point out that David's abrupt opinion is based on quite incomplete evidence, even in his own assessment of absolutes, as formulated in his journal. I highly respect his thoughts which lead us to the universal absolutes direction, but not when he states he has found them all, or at the least, that "All is matter in a void", as this idea can easily be taken apart by just realizing the heat generated by all linear and angular velocity of such matter, when reverse or forward engineered, would remove the remaining heat from the existing "matter in a void" universe, as envisioned by David, and we'd be left with the more true state of the universe of pure thermodynamic/hyydrodynamic potential energy. It's only common sense to see such a dynamic play out in our logic, if we stop accepting religions such as Einstein's and David's statements and theories, when in fact, they are all quite incomplete, or we still wouldn't be searching for the real TOE.

Joseph's thermodynamic equilibrium ideas, or at the least his ideas leading in this very direction are very valid. We must step beyond absolute/non-absolute space, and study a truly absolute void, of true and pure thermodynamic infinity, truly lacking of all, and I mean all heat. Everyone must realize the equilibrium process that would have played out before matter heat entered the first wave/star universe. Each of the smallest quantum/wave/matter/particles, in reality exists at very high temperatures, estimated by plasma physicists at somewhere around 1000 to 2000 degrees F. The reason we don't experience such heat is the coldness of the void between such wave/particles, i.e., herein lies the true thermodynamic equilibrium of the universal infinite void before first heat wave/matter/star. It has been my opinion for years that we need much more investigation in this very area___the thermodynamic/hydrodynamic infinite origin of first wave, matter or particle, however you want it.

Joseph is spot on for taking us in this direction.

regards,
Lloyd

[dleviwing]

Lloyd;
Unless Joseph goes by the name “smart1234” on the science news forum, he is just making the same conclusions as others from over 10 years ago or longer.

I’m pleased that you comprehended so much from just the few fundamental writings I presented to you, but I think you have been reading too much between the lines of my post here. I don’t see where you find my post as a promotion of my own theory. Unlike others, I attempt to do that only in my own threads.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

David, much of ten years ago, and longer, is still more valid than much of today's non-sense___just as Newton is more valid than Einstein___when we need to do serious science___especially math, just as the Copenhagen Agreement, well settled, in the thirties___it's Newtonian math is still used, as you well know, for most all real quantum, srt and grt calculations... It's just we need to go much deeper than Milo Wolff's WSM ideas of wave/matter "Religion!"___or Einstien's and Heisenberg's "Religions!" Logic and real science demands we show rationally, how first wave/matter was created___or linear and angular momentum, as the same___was created... With a bit more imagination___all is possible... It all remains no more than "Religion", until we show "How!" Just stating theories doesn't make it so... We need complete empirical rationalism, to the absolute facts___the completeness of all the incompletenesses... Then we have the real TOE... I think this would be reduction to its infinitely smallest possibility___is that not right...? In that case, we must reduce the waves[linear and angular motion] to their true first energy states___true first motion... The prime mover___thermodynamics___No...?

regards

[dleviwing]

Lloyd;
I could not agree with you more. Though you state things differently than I, we are actually saying the same thing with only a few different detailed observations.
Our debate may not be appropriate in this thread. Would you care to start a thread to go into the topic of momentum and wave functions??

[mkirkpatrick]

This seems to have started some controversy Robert,no names,no pack drill,
what is your view on this?

regards michael.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

David, I'd be glad to start a new thread to discuss this topic, it's just that I'm presently on a very weak air-card connection, in a campground, enjoying the beach. I'll try to make connections as the weather allows. Today I'll be on the beach, but I will restart the topic as soon as weather conditions of air-card transmission allow. The topic I will post is "The Thermo-Hydro-Dynamic Prime Cause of Momentum and Wave Functions". I'll post somewhere in discussion of theory details. I'll pm you when I post, as to position of topic.

thanks,
Lloyd

Originally Posted by dleviwing Lloyd; I could not agree with you more. Though you state things differently than I, we are actually saying the same thing with only a few different detailed observations. Our debate may not be appropriate in this thread. Would you care to start a thread to go into the topic of momentum and wave functions??

[Joseph]

Hello David & Lloyd,

I appreciate both your comments on my article.

Basically, David, the article was an attempt to propose a new, general explanation of the universe by assuming not that the universe is composed entirely of some totally undefinable substance called energy which was subsequently somehow turned into EM waves and particles of matter by the big bang, which is the theory currently accepted by the physics community, but that, instead, the universe is composed entirely of elastic EM waves which propagate helically instead of sinusoidally through space, that these EM waves were compressed into a small volume and then released, causing the big bang.

Using these initial conditions, I then went on to explain in very general terms how one could come up with an explanation of the universe from the beginning of time up to the present which would (probably) answer all the questions on that list. And in such a way that the answers all fit together, interlock together, you might say, like the pieces of a jigsaw puzzle, to give us our first clear and reasonable picture of the universe.

One more thing. As near as I can tell, this explanation of the universe fits perfectly with many of the mathematical models of various parts and pieces of the universe, i.e., special relativity, E=mc2, the electron cloud, already widely accepted throughout the physics community. Which is, of course, absolutely essential if there is any truth to this proposed theory at all.

If you can point me to the book, essay, article, website, or such as that which already does this, well, I'll be not only surprised, but, after I get over my embarrassment, relieved that I don't need to go on down this road any farther.

One more thing, David. You seem to be one who relies heavily on mathematics for modeling the universe. And deservedly so. After all, mathematics is not only extremely powerful and precise in that regard, but also, it seems, to some degree prescient in its ability to tell us things about the universe we never even knew. Would you like to know why this is so? This proposed view of the universe can answer that for you.

Joseph

[mkirkpatrick]

Just a word of support Joseph,and to thank you again for your effort in bringing your work to our attention,one has to rise above the knockers
and those who try to negate effort expressed and detailed.
regards michael.