Particle & String fundamentals

[baudrunner]

It strikes me as somewhat pathetic that they are desperately seeking another Einstein just to come up with more "cosmological constant" scenarios, someone who can make the mathematics fit some theory that probably just isn't true to begin with.

Problem is, there is so little for genius to do once the logic is all worked out.

[Guille]

It strikes me as somewhat pathetic that they are desperately seeking another Einstein just to come up with more "cosmological constant" scenarios, someone who can make the mathematics fit some theory that probably just isn't true to begin with.

Problem is, there is so little for genius to do once the logic is all worked out.

I agree. Creativity has decreased greatlly in respect to the development of thought in the 20th century due to the mathematical thinking expansion world wide.

[subversion]

or just absence... But I think this is not possible anyway for our universe. Because vacuum space means that there is no gravity

but what if you consider that pure force is invisible and propagates through empty space? That is the intrinsic definition of force. Like you could have two solid objects, with a complete empty vacuum in between them, and those two objects would still attract via gravity.

ps. good luck on your new version of GR. Sounds exciting

[Guille]

but what if you consider that pure force is invisible and propagates through empty space? That is the intrinsic definition of force. Like you could have two solid objects, with a complete empty vacuum in between them, and those two objects would still attract via gravity.

ps. good luck on your new version of GR. Sounds exciting

Thanks, I need the luck.

I've considered the possibiliy of force to propagate through empty space, but it can't be for if force can go through empty space then there must neccesarilly be energy, and if the is energy there must be matter. So it woudln't be empty space. if there is spacetime, there is force, if there is force, there is energy, if there is energy, there is matter.

[subversion]

Thanks, I need the luck.

I've considered the possibiliy of force to propagate through empty space, but it can't be for if force can go through empty space then there must neccesarilly be energy, and if the is energy there must be matter. So it woudln't be empty space. if there is spacetime, there is force, if there is force, there is energy, if there is energy, there is matter.

so you are suggesting that two objects with nothing in between would not have gravitational attraction at play?

[Guille]

so you are suggesting that two objects with nothing in between would not have gravitational attraction at play?

The thing is that there is NEVER nothing in between them. Force propagates through space, but not in space. That's what baud and I were saying.

[baudrunner]

Have we forgotten Time?

Here's the TOE then: We cannot have a void existing for all time because time was created when energy was created. Energy has mass because of spec motion velocity and angular momentum contributing to Time as well according to GR, which is proved. In other words as particle spec motion velocity approaches "light speed" time and mass are the products that produce the continuum of everything that exists, including space. Therefore we conclude that the entire Universe is an encapsulation of energy. There is no such thing as an empty void because where would its continuum come from?

[Guille]

Have we forgotten Time?

Here's the TOE then: We cannot have a void existing for all time because time was created when energy was created. Energy has mass because of spec motion velocity and angular momentum contributing to Time as well according to GR, which is proved. In other words as particle spec motion velocity approaches "light speed" time and mass are the products that produce the continuum of everything that exists, including space. Therefore we conclude that the entire Universe is an encapsulation of energy. There is no such thing as an empty void because where would its continuum come from?

Perfectly explained. Whoever still doubts about empty space and what there could be after reading this thread is closed in his own illusion.

[subversion]

what the hell is spec motion?

anyway, I would like to reply to this quote, which refers to any two seperate objects

The thing is that there is NEVER nothing in between them.

ahhh, this is a good argument, but you are ignoring one thing. If there is NEVER nothing in between them, this means that there is ALWAYS something. But the problem is this means the universe would have to be infinitely dense. WE know that the universe is not infinitely dense, therefore it must be composed partially of empty space, and partially of matter. Therefore in order for gravity to be far reaching it must have the ability to propagate through empty space because space is not completely full, or else it would have to be infinitely dense. SO I have just proven logically that empty space MUST exist or else the universe would be infinitely dense which it is not. This should be obvious, so please either agree that this is correct or try to disprove it again so that we can figure out who's right and eventually reach an agreement.

SubVersion!!!!!!!

[Guille]

what the hell is spec motion?

anyway, I would like to reply to this quote, which refers to any two seperate objects



ahhh, this is a good argument, but you are ignoring one thing. If there is NEVER nothing in between them, this means that there is ALWAYS something. But the problem is this means the universe would have to be infinitely dense. WE know that the universe is not infinitely dense, therefore it must be composed partially of empty space, and partially of matter. Therefore in order for gravity to be far reaching it must have the ability to propagate through empty space because space is not completely full, or else it would have to be infinitely dense. SO I have just proven logically that empty space MUST exist or else the universe would be infinitely dense which it is not. This should be obvious, so please either agree that this is correct or try to disprove it again so that we can figure out who's right and eventually reach an agreement.

SubVersion!!!!!!!

Understand me. What I mean is that either the empty space is very small, or it is jsut the space in between the necleuses of the atoms. Of course there is not always something, for that would be total density. Nevertheless, there is no true vacuum, that is, no place without matter, energy and force, for that place would not exist. I draw it like this:
Force<--Energy<--Matter-->Space-->Time

That is, Matter is the fundamental start of existence, but it can only exist with the other four, but allways there is matter, there are the other four. First, matter implies energy and space directly, for they are somehow more united to it, and these derive respectivelly force and time. But these two are also neccesary for existence. The five concepts make up the Pentagon Pillars Of Nature (2P-ON. phonetically written, this is 'To Be ON', TBON. Which could also mean: Theoretic Breakthrough On Nature).