Thread: Urod-isms from physics

Originally Posted by 15uliane

Urod, please.(Sorry Dkav I don't know, but I am curious)

15ulane , my post here vanished and I did not get even notification of replies , I have on-going problems here , even the Formatting of the text I type ( but NO one else has those problems ... I know , my UPN disqualifies the theory of Relativity , a darling of certain people ) ... but you can look at the original located at the very end of this web site :Recipe for a Nation | Future shocking , an universal survival manual for any intelligent specie , in any galaxy , and it starts with a peaceful Revolution … the ultimate political Platform that you want in your life time ! The theory is called Unifying Property of Nature ( UPN ) , you can also read it here in this forum where is also best to comment on it .I mentioned it because it provides the answer to the question :Is the Universe an open or closed system ?Accepting that water can cut steel and super fluids observed in laboratory produce sponteneous vortices , we can confidently procede with the knowladge that appearances are deceiving and different states of a substance produce different properties .Hence , arriving to the conclusion that our Universe is actually a Super Fluid and we are it spinning at the speed of light in tiny vortices is acceptable to our sense , slowly but surely .The answer to the closed/open system question is as simple as stating that no absolute vacuum ( the absence of everithing , i.e. nothingness ) can be produced anywhere . There is no 'hole' that can be in the 'fabric' of the Universe , and this is not a Postulate but a fact since Nothigness ... doesn't exist ( as the name implies ) . It is just an abstract notion that we can use to judge and analyse it's opposite , the Somethigness , what ever that may be .By not being able to leave 'holes' in the Universe it sets the system with no end , eternal in time , with no begining and no end possible . I am saying 'possible' for the same simple reason that it is im-possible to create/exit Nothigness , hence it is impossible to 'stop; or 'end' the Universe .The best description of the Universe therefore could be " it is since forever and as big as it can be " , in other words there are no limits both in time and available space , no begining and no end . Ya , I get dizzy just trying to imagine that .The consequences are delicious : - all phenomenon can be just waves , vortices and harmonics - all possible combinations of micro-vortices ( see the UPN ) arrangaments per square light year of space are repeated as long as intelligent life doesn't interfeer . I know , sounds like fiction but only to those that do not understand the scientific proverb " eternity is enough time that a monkey typing at random will eventually write all Shakespareean plays " .... Dig that and suddenly the "repeat" theme jumps out solid as a rock ( the monkey has enough time to go through ALL possible combinations of letters and spaces including the unique one which spells Shakespare's writings , as an exampe ) .- time/space can not be stretched/shrunk , the SuperFluid ( see UPN ) is ... uncompressible . This means that if we know how to use this property we can send message instanteniously through the Endless Universe , as fiction as it may sound , yet if it is uncompressible distances do not make ANY difference ...... MESSAGE to MODERATORS : by now I got the message , I am not wanted here , continiously I have problems logging in , my posts get deleted , can't format what I type ... ,,, BUT do you people Understand that is NOTHING you can do about the UPN , YOU CAN NOT CHANGE NATURE ! .......... Do you realize also that Google saves all this and later on some of you will be taken to task when the judges will be judged ? .......what are you gona say , that you didn't Understand the UPN when a ten year old could ?

Originally Posted by Dkav

I guess that because there is nothing beyond the universe, it is a closed system, but that would be contrary to laws of thermodynamics...can someone explain this to me in a simple language?

Here is a good quotation : " ... An open universe expands forever because it does not contain enough mass, and so does not have enough gravity to slow the expansion of space. A closed universe contains enough mass to halt the expansion, and eventually collapses.A universe with a "critical density" of matter in space is exactly balanced between these two alternatives, and expandsat an ever-slowing rate. " . ---- http://oposite.stsci.edu/pubinfo/pr/96/21/expand.pdf ---- Sorry , I can not Format the text I type -----------Notice first that every one assumes that the Universe is expanding . It is based on observations that interpreted the output of the instruments , not base on a valid theory ! ( it's like observing a car from the outside trying to guess how it works inside , good luck ! ) . Knowing the Universe is logic let's use it and see what happends . ---------- Expansion means there are at least two different elements/substances so one expends into the other . This leads to two or more local Universes that are different from each other . T his leads to the conclusion that the entire Universe ( 2 or more components ) is not uniform . But that's OK since we may be looking at the same Properties of the entire Universe expressed differently in a few variations including our local Universe . We can stop here , there is nothing special , just variations of the same Properties ( Laws of Nature ) ........ Unless you wonder : 1) as 'thin' as the Deep Space is , considered 'vacuum' , makes you wonder how the heck it can expend further since it implies that What it expends into must be even 'Thinner' ! Unless we ignor the actual Space and consider only the matter that we see , in which case we can not assume ( nor measured with instruments ) that the actual Space is expanding ! ......... What we see is more like objects flying away from each other in the air without the air acually expanding . ------ So 'they' Must be assuming that the Space is also expanding , that's Why they say that the Universe is expending ( not just matter ) . Now we have problems because for the actual Space to expand means : - it must create Space from nothing ( was not there before ) Huge issue here , no ? - it must Encroach on the 'stuff' that it expends into , and since Space is fundamental it can not be added on top of it self , hence 'they' assume that the new formed ( expanded ) Space must destroy or make dissapear the Space that is expanding into . Huge issue , no ? How can Fundamental Space can vanish ( or be created from nothing ) ? ....---- Defining Fundamental Space , as you can see , it is crucial to have a better understanding and apply logic eficiently . ..... Knowing what is offered in science on this subject ( nothing , because they still debate the issue ) , I have no choice but start from the begining in answering your question " is the Universe an Open or Closed system" . ......Question # 1 : How do you define Nothigness ? As trivial as this sounds , it bears profound effects into how we define the opposite , the Somethingness . If you care please reply so we can start the process right here . ..... If you can't wait go to the original post ( the very end of the web site ) and read ahead the Unifying Property of Nature ( UPN ) .... All this beacause science up to now could not define Fundamental Space hence the UPN surfaced naturally ...... Recipe for a Nation | Future shocking , an universal survival manual for any intelligent specie , in any galaxy , and it starts with a peaceful Revolution … the ultimate political Platform that you want in your life time ! ----- but please post comments here in the Science Forum , thank you ! ----- Appologise for not being able to format the text ----- ( no one bothered helping even though one of my posts here was deleted ..... ) ****

Thank you Moderator Harold from protecting me from 'science' and moving me to its antipol "pseudo" ( how about Also a tip or help in text formating , as you can see is a mess and I run out of options ) ..... Please read the following : ..... Besides observing that the present physics theory can not explain many phenomenon we register , let's also notice its main problem , the absence of a firm , clear reference frame or measuring stick to gage the properties of the Universe at both scales , atomic and macro ...... The UPN provides a reference frame that no other theory does and that's the simple reason why it can explain everithing since it proves that all is made out of the SuperFluid , its waves , vortices and harmonics ...... Here is the caveated reference frame : Nothingness ! ...... ( don't leave Harold , the good part starts now ) .... --- Explanation : Nothingness and Somethigness are mutually exclusive , hence there is a perfect relation that can be used to explain the properties of Nature/matter/SuperFluid without guessing or assuming , here is an example Harold : ........ How old is the Universe ? Present phhysics can not answer but the UPN is perfectly clear : since Nothigness ( the concept , an abstract ) exists since 'for ever' ( Nothigness did not 'start' on a certain date ) , its counterpart , the Somethigness , the Universe also exists since for ever . There was no begining of the Nothigness hence there is no begining for the Somethigness , just as Nothigness will never end or closed down the Somethigness will also exist for ever , the Universe has no begining and no end on the Time scale . QED , done ! ..... Hey Harold , can you argue with that ? I chalange you ! ..... If you can't than you must return the UPN to the Physics forum and move the Quantum Theory to Pseudo Science ! ......... Go ahead Harold , I am waiting for you to argue or agree with this first step , determining the age of the Universe as was done above .......--------------- The concept of using the Nothigness to determine the properties of the Universe is the key the UPN uses and has the following huge advantages : ...1) Nothigness , as an abstract will never interfeer ( enter ) with any math or formulas ........ 2) Nothigness is absolutelly tied to Somethigness as its reciprocal , where one is the other can not be , this is a fact not theory ........ 3) Nothigness is Absolute , it doesn't have any grey areas , borders , buffer or a numerical value , it DOES NOT EXIST period . Those are powerful properties because it implies precisely that where Nothigness is absent Somethigness Must be present because Nothigness doesn't exist . Harold , do you realize at this moment that the SIZE of the Universe was just stated in the previous sentance that you just read ? No ? Here is why , again thanks to Nothigness : can Nothigness be "present" anywhere at all , are there Any restriction regarding where it can not be applied ? Of course not , hence its concept is valid anywhere so Somethigness must be present Everywhere . Does Nothigness has a Limit or space that it doesn't apply ? Of course not hence there are no limits to the size of Somethigness ( the Universe ) . QED , Harold , argue with this or return the UPN to its proper Science forum location and move the Quantum theory to Pseudo sciense please . I am saying this anticipating that you will not be able to dismiss the above logic ........ I am looking forward to your reply ! ........ Urod ...... August 12 , 2011 .......... BTW , please read ( not 'speed' ) the UPN from the begining and see why it is indeed the so-called grand unifying theory of physiscs .... all we need is a super computer to do the simulations ...... do you have any connections , Harold , who wants to make History ? ( observe also the super fluid math provided by Prof Ballagh , with the note that it is for a Granular super fluid , atomic , NOT the non-granular SuperFluid described by the UPN ) ......UPN original site ( at the end of this web page ) : .... Recipe for a Nation | Future shocking , an universal survival manual for any intelligent specie , in any galaxy , and it starts with a peaceful Revolution … the ultimate political Platform that you want in your life time !

I honestly want to read what you are saying, but I think you need to use the return key before I can manage it.

Like this.

Originally Posted by iainmacb

I honestly want to read what you are saying, but I think you need to use the return key before I can manage it.Like this.

First of all I am floored by your interest ! I have been punished by the Admin for posting the UPN that proves Einstein wrong so now I can't format my text ! ........ Herold , moderator saw my postings messed up like they are but didn't bother offering solutions ..... and the Site is under NEW Administration !!! ------ Please read the UPN and criticize it , just don't insult me please , Giant Evil did enough of it with the blessings of the Admin ( it is illegal to insult , based on the Rules of Usage , but the "moderators`never scolded GiantEvil and others ......... one of them even `took his gloves off`!!! , in a science forum !! .....

I am curious why you would say somethingness is the opposite of nothingness. To me, the opposite of something would not be the absence of that something, but a void created by that something when it was plucked from nothing. Does this make sense?

1 is not the opposite of zero.

1 is the opposite of (-1).

Together, 1 + (-1) = 0

In other words, in order to create something from nothing, you need only have the true opposite of that something. I like to think of matter and anti-matter in this way. I think this also helps to explain attraction or gravitation, in that the something and anti-something are constantly revolving toward an equilibrium (nothingness).

Originally Posted by The-Ology

I am curious why you would say somethingness is the opposite of nothingness. To me, the opposite of something would not be the absence of that something, but a void created by that something when it was plucked from nothing. Does this make sense?1 is not the opposite of zero.1 is the opposite of (-1).Together, 1 + (-1) = 0In other words, in order to create something from nothing, you need only have the true opposite of that something. I like to think of matter and anti-matter in this way. I think this also helps to explain attraction or gravitation, in that the something and anti-something are constantly revolving toward an equilibrium (nothingness).

..................................Please forgive text formating , Admin problems .......Lovely comparision with anti-matter ........ Yet in all fairness the anti-matter it self is also 'somethigness' ...... So while 'somethigness' can take various forms , the 'nothigness' is always the same , non-existant ........ Now , If someone has Zero apples it doesn't mean there are no more apples in the Universe , on the other hand 'nothigness' is absolute , beyound Zero , Universal , and it doesn't refer to a particular element or object ....... Its purpose in the UPN is to be a solid reference frame against which we can describe with certanty the Properties of Somethigness ......... and the absolute absence of everithing is a perfect reference because it is so absolute ( it doesn't exist ) ........ ---------------............... Keep in mind that right now Physics does not have any solid reference points , in contrary - to my disbeliefe - scientists entertain the Relativity theory that further creates chaos by intoducing the concept that all is relative ! Wow ! I say AND proved in contrary that we enjoy TWO absolute reference points : the abstract notion of `nothigness`and the Foundation of the Universe , the SuperFluid that all is made out of and hence is the absolute frame of reference ( don`t confuse it with ether ) .... Further more , the interaction between matter and antimatter is actualy a process in which both are reduced to movement and their Common Foundation , the SuperFluid ( see UPN ) .............. Please read the UPN and come back with your suggestion , Thank you !

NOTE : I did not started this thread , Harold ( Moderator ) did , so the foot-note associated with the thread is false .....

Originally Posted by iainmacb

I honestly want to read what you are saying, but I think you need to use the return key before I can manage it.Like this.

Oh REALLY ?? ( Return key ) Like This ??

Take a look again at your 'smart' reply , see you Format ?

Ya , it's screwed .... do you think that I am some IT genius that Manipulates the Science Forum software ??????

And : Do you Judge a Book by its Font ???? How about Really showing your Smarts and proving wrong Just One Single Logic Step in the UPN ! No ?? YOU BET ! .......

The Unifying Property of Nature ( UPN ) | The Unifying Property of Nature ( UPN ) , the Real Unifying theory of physics that you and the rest of the 'big=shots' here can not touch but just comment about the no-Return key ( that is caused by the Forum software , not me , BUT HOW SMART They can be NOT to notice that their OWN replies are displayed Without the Return Key !!!!

If you people can not take a hint from such an Obvious clue , than How can I expect you to strain your selves by reading the simple Logic Steps in the UPN , NEVERmind troubleshooting them !!! ( Return key ) ......

Urod-isms ? Ya , something that you can not find faults with , Thank you !

One line.

carriage return

another line

carriage return

Perhaps you should get a new keyboard.

Originally Posted by Urod

And : Do you Judge a Book by its Font ???? How about Really showing your Smarts and proving wrong Just One Single Logic Step in the UPN ! No ?? YOU BET ! .......

Yeah, we can and we have. It's a perfect solid. That's all there is to it.