[Planet_Bob]

Relationship

That's not the title, that's it. The TOE is just that - Relationship.

From The General Theory of Relativity (One object's Relationship with another) to being a good person (Your relationship with society). It all comes down to Relationships.

From the smallest particles, photons, and their relationships with other particles and how that in turn creates complex structures, to the largest truck and if it doesn't get out of your way, you're going to end up as a hood ornament, there are relationships going on all around us, all the time and it is these relationships that determine who and what we are.

There you go, simple. A <-> B

Alright, each relationship can be viewed in a more complex way, but fundementally, cut away all the math and other superfluous stuff and they all come down to a straight forward relationship between two things.

If you are a content person, then the phrase 'Happy with yourself' ends up being just another relationship.

So the TOE in fact it comes down to being the relationship between one or more things.

PB.

[mkirkpatrick]

PB,good to see you back,like the idea of relationships.
regards michael.

[Planet_Bob]

Too simple or just simple enough ?

It's certainly vague enough to cover just about anything you want to throw at it, but at the same time provide answers.

Q: Why is the sky blue ?
A: It's actually not blue, it's your relationship to it that makes it appear blue.

Q: Why does the clock on a space ship travelling near the speed of light run slowly.
A: It's your relationship to the space ship that makes it appear to run more slowly. Somebody else may see it running at a different rate, because they have their own relationship to the space ship.

See, one size fits all.

PB.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Originally Posted by Planet_Bob Q: Why does the clock on a space ship travelling near the speed of light run slowly? PB.

Hi Planet_Bob, just let me state, IMO, the clock doesn't run slower, it's hydrodynamic mass velocity density, pressure increase, radiates the clock, space ship, and all passengers out into space, to infinity, or the next nearest radiation collecting source of matter___if space travel at that velocity were possible___which it's not. One should not confuse Einstein's abstract analytical reasoning, with Einstein's factual universe...

Regards,
Lloyd

[quanta07]

Welcome back Planet Bob,
I think this is a good observation and I agree with the simplicity of relationship.
A relationship between the observer and observed...a viewpoint of relative perspective.
Time dilation predicted by relativity is continually tested by NASA, using cesium clocks.
To date, all test results support Einstein relativity predictions.
I guess you find the simplest relationship which fits all for a TOE?
Will this require a new relationship...a new viewpoint of relative perspective?
again, welcome back........Q7

[Planet_Bob]

Well, here it is. . . . My T.O.E.


It's simple, functional and drawn in nice colours.

The labels are fairly generic, but more specific labels can be used depending on the application. Work can also represent Mass, Effort can also represent Resitance and Ease can represent Permeability.

The label for the right angle has been ommitted, enough to say that as a right angle it implies that whatever you are trying to resolve is in the same, or similar, Frame of Reference. For the moment I'll just leave it as a right angle.

Not convinced ?

Here's a worked example.

Re-label the side Work as Mass and the angle Effort as Frequency

Whatever right angled triangle you draw, now alter the size of the Mass or the Energy. The two angles change as well.

Take the TAN of the angle your have relabeled Frequency and check it against its original value.
Double the Energy and the Frequency will increase by a factor of 2. Double the Mass and the Frequency is reduced by half. Any values in between will correctly provide you with the change in Frequency.
Of course it works if you alter the Frequency angle as well, giving you the resulting Mass or Energy, which ever one you were looking for.

A very simple example showing that far from being an interesting curriosity, that it does actually provide real answers to problems.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Originally Posted by Planet_Bob Not convinced ? Here's a worked example. Re-label the side Work as Mass and the angle Effort as Frequency Whatever right angled triangle you draw, now alter the size of the Mass or the Energy. The two angles change as well. Take the TAN of the angle your have relabeled Frequency and check it against its original value. Double the Energy and the Frequency will increase by a factor of 2. Double the Mass and the Frequency is reduced by half. Any values in between will correctly provide you with the change in Frequency. Of course it works if you alter the Frequency angle as well, giving you the resulting Mass or Energy, which ever one you were looking for. A very simple example showing that far from being an interesting curriosity, that it does actually provide real answers to problems.

Very, very interesting___I'm thinking...

regards,

[Planet_Bob]

Originally Posted by Lloyd Gillespie Very, very interesting___I'm thinking...

It is interesting, isn't it.

Ohm's Law, Boyle's Law, they're all in there because essentially they are just a straight forward relationship between entities.
Even Einstein's theories of Relativity are no than just relationships.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Originally Posted by Planet_Bob It is interesting, isn't it. Ohm's Law, Boyle's Law, they're all in there because essentially they are just a straight forward relationship between entities. Even Einstein's theories of Relativity are no than just relationships.

Planet_Bob, can you show us a mathematical example___say, the real math of the "Mass Gap" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yang%E2...e_and_mass_gap I'd personally like to see your figures of this unsolved problem... If this one is beyond your TOE's ability, please just show the figures for mass...

Thank you and,
Regards,
Lloyd

[Planet_Bob]

Originally Posted by Lloyd Gillespie Planet_Bob, can you show us a mathematical example___say, the real math of the "Mass Gap"

After the prize of $1,000,000 for yourself ......

The T.O.E. should be able to explain laws of physics. Physics theories on the other hand are just that, theories and may in reality eventually be disproven. The Mass Gap is taken from the quantum field theory and the Mass Gap you are asking for is an assumed mass gap, and not one that has ever been proved mathematically.

I'll get back to you.

PB.