Idea on mavity

[Elixir]

As has been said, the reason people are dismissing your "idea" (I'm being generous there) is because of your lack of understanding of basic science.

Start with the simple stuff before you try and postulate about quantum mechanics and spacetime.

 

[Radiation]

This is neither theory nor hypothesis (at least not in the scientific sense).

It's pretty much nothing, you just made stuff up based on assumptions without any scientific base.

I appreciate your imagination though.

What do you mean by i've just made stuff up?

Most understanding comes about through current knowledge, thought and imagination, Einstein didn't come up with with his theories based on nothing or his imagination alone. No he used information from his time, some imagination but a lot more deep thought and observations, later came more of the heavy maths to show his theories are likely right, i have done much the same but will leave the maths for those bothered about it, however remember he was right before the maths came.

I see patterns and based on current information have put forward a new way mavity may work, much of the maths is done already, we know how things act under mavity, however we don't know what it is or causes it.

My example about the electron and the photon was to make a point, both act similarly when under the influence of a field or mavity.

How do we know space curvature is right, what if it's a field effect, what if it's resonance or like pressure, things act the way they do and we have the maths for that but we don't know what mavity really is do we?

 

[feedtheram]

You haven't taken into consideration the Lythco effect. This would positively charge the SSV mass to an extent any fluctuations would be absorbed.

Case closed.

 

[Elixir]

Einstein didn't come up with with his theories based on nothing or his imagination alone. No he used information from his time, some imagination but a lot more deep thought and observations, later came more of the heavy maths to show his theories are likely right, i have done much the same but will leave the maths for those bothered about it, however remember he was right before the maths came.

The expansion of the universe may explain mavity or rather the expansion of stuff within the universe may do, imagine the planet is getting larger, if you throw a ball in the air and the ball is getting larger at the same rate, the space inbetween should become smaller.

The fact you're comparing the absolutely incorrect horse **** that comes out of your mouth with Einstein is remarkable.

 

[BetaNumeric]

Like i've said this is an idea or theory, the maths might look much the same, for example an electron passing by a magnetic field might workout similar a photon passing by a black hole, both have similar effects of curving their path but they're quite different in reality.

Actually those are quite different. mavity and electromagnetism have a number of important differences. For example, mavity can only attract while electromagnetism can also repel. Furthermore your example of a magnetic field is particularly inappropriate due to the relationship between the magnetic field lines, the motion of the particle and the force imparted on it, they are not aligned, while the force due to mavity is aligned with the field.

No because it is based on available information and thought, things have a likelihood of possibility, my idea is arguably a lot more likely than saying god did it

You might think you're basing your ideas on 'available information' but you aren't really. You're using the most superficial of understanding which you've obtained by reading other people's simplified (and thus necessarily not entirely accurate) descriptions of models you have no experience of.

most understanding comes first from ideas and thought leading to experimentation and mathematical models, like i said maths is useful if you want to use the information but understanding things on a human level is just as valuable, you should never try to stop freethinking, we still don't know the true nature of reality, we know how a lot of stuff acts but that doesn't always tell us what it really is or how it relates.

You speak as if you're coming from hands on experience. Given the various clangers you seem to say with regularity just what are you basing the above on? Have you actually done any maths or physics? How do you know how real research is done? Have you developed an idea to the point of working models and experiments? I would hazard a guess that you haven't, so I really do want to know why you think your evaluation of how research in maths and physics is done is based upon?

Why does that matter to me though?

Im not necessarily trying to make or do something with this information, im simply trying to come up with a theory that explains or helps us understand why things work the way they do, not detailed maths to make a computer work, that's great for others to do if they wish but most theories start as thoughts based on previous knowledge, if i know a result from an equation said some previous basic theory was true, i can take that knowing what i may come up with is deeper or a different way of understanding.

Again, what are you basing all of this one? You talk as if you know how researchers do their research, how people conceive new ideas and develop them to conclusions.

Speaking as someone with maths and physics research to his name, several papers published in reputable journals, a job title "Research mathematician" and a great many other researchers in my circles of friends, colleagues and acquaintances I'm actually basing what I've said to you on experience. I also spend a lot of time on science forums, where there are plenty of people spouting their pet 'theories' (by the way, a scientific theory is one which makes quantitative predictions which can be tested, have been tested and passed. An untested model is an hypothesis. Your ideas don't even reach that level) and none of them get anywhere close to working models.

ost understanding comes about through current knowledge, thought and imagination, Einstein didn't come up with with his theories based on nothing or his imagination alone. No he used information from his time, some imagination but a lot more deep thought and observations, later came more of the heavy maths to show his theories are likely right, i have done much the same but will leave the maths for those bothered about it, however remember he was right before the maths came.

Einstein had a PhD in physics before he worked in that patent office and during his development of general relativity he worked with Hilbert, the greatest mathematician of the last century.

I see patterns and based on current information have put forward a new way mavity may work, much of the maths is done already, we know how things act under mavity, however we don't know what it is or causes it.

You really have no idea how science works. Please don't give yourself delusions of grandeur. You've already shown how badly you really understand the stuff you're spouting about, yet you continue to believe you've got an understanding of it.

Don't get me wrong, I spouted a few "Perhaps you could explain X by ...." ideas when I was younger but looking back with a lot of hindsight I see how laughably naive I was. I know it is 'cool' to wax lyrical about dark energy, strings, black hole thermodynamics, zero point energy etc but unless you've got some grasp of some of the details you might as well be talking about the atomic weight of chocolate pudding and it's spin coupling to kangaroos.

 

[PondPikey]

Just wanted to butt in and say what an awesome thread.

Personally, I'm backing Radiation on this one. Gotta love a fighter.

 

[w11tho]

Waxing lyrical about Universes made of bubbles of happiness that intertwine with waves of positive energy while traversing a landscape of invisible sea monkeys is easy. Backing that up with an accurate, falsifiable model is hard.

John Baez has a wonderful "crackpot index" that lists things, in increasing order of magnitude, which help to identify crackpots. One of them refers to those who say "I have the ideas, I just need someone to fill in the mathematics". This point seems quite apt.

 

[timebomb26]

http://www.petapixel.com/2012/03/27/55-hour-exposure-of-a-tiny-patch-of-sky-reveals-200000-galaxies/

....it's space related.