Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Q.E.D.

Regulars
  • Content Count

    87
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Q.E.D. reacted to Boydstun in Tests of General Relativity   
    A reliable online reference for relativity, special and general, is Einstein Online.

    Also, on special relativity, “Space, Rotation, Relativity” – Part 4.
  2. Downvote
    Q.E.D. reacted to T-1000 in P2P currency   
    This is false. For example it is completely moral to have prohibition of nuclear weapons. Or anything else that threatens national security. Such as bitcoin.

    Serious question: Are you a libertarian or an anarchist?
  3. Like
    Q.E.D. reacted to Grames in P2P currency   
    Serious question: Are you a fascist or a conservative?
  4. Like
    Q.E.D. reacted to Jake_Ellison in Listening to Music that is not Art   
    I don't know Tim McGraw, but from the more general stuff you wrote I'll assume you appreciate music for the right reasons. With that assumption in mind, I would like to point out that there is in fact a huge amount of good music out there (both new and old), it's just that most of the new stuff is only moderately popular.

    I think you should put more energy into finding whatever it is that you consider good music, instead of settling for what you consider mediocre. And give those random indie bands (or famous composers, wherever your search takes you) more than one chance. If one composition contains anything even remotely interesting, search out a few more, you might stumble upon a gold mine.


    I do sometimes (less and less, though) watch an average movie (even though I know it's not that good ahead of time), simply because there are so few good new movies, and I've seen the old ones. But that's not the case with music at all. I of course try to listen to all sorts of stuff once, but would never settle into listening to a musician I'm not impressed with. There's just too much great stuff out there, to do that.
  5. Downvote
    Q.E.D. got a reaction from jayrocksit in Theoretical Physics   
    Correct physical reasoning (even to a non-Objectivist theoretical physicist) would involve drawing general/universal principles from the observed world. Its okay to have inspiration, but it has to at least relate to, explain, or unify some already existent principles or observables. Learn some math, get a basic introductory physics textbook. Geometry and algebra are your friends.
  6. Downvote
    Q.E.D. reacted to jayrocksit in Theoretical Physics   
    WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT MY THEORIES

    Main Theory #1: A MODEL OF THE UNIVERSE WITH 5 DIMENSIONS (IF THE FOURTH DIMENSION IS TIME)

    I believe that a black hole or singularity is an access portal to the 5 th dimension. It could be held open and stable because the 5th dimension forces the neutrons away from the center making a perfect circular ring that can attach our 3 dimensional plane to the 5 th dimension. Which would allow the energy from matter in our 3 dimensional universe access to the fifth dimension. The energy could then spread out in the 5th dimension where it could stick to or be absorbed in a sense by the outer shell of any Three dimensional universe or bubble. You will never see the 5th plane because it is not in our three dimensions. I believe the 5th dimension is what houses our universe and maybe an infinite number of universes. This could allow for the expansion and contraction of all the universes or bubbles in the 5th dimension and could also allow for enough energy to build up in the 5 th dimension to create a new 3 dimensional bubble for matter to form and expand (example: The Big Bang). It could also explain why, when we look past 15 billion light years we are not seeing any formations of galaxies or solar systems. It just may be that we are seeing the beginning of creation. Where the energy is just starting to form into matter on the outer edge of our bubble. As we travel closer to the singularity in our galaxy we will experience severe time distortion. It may be possible that we will actually travel back to the beginning of creation.

    Theory#2: A FOLDED AND OSCILLATING THREE DIMENSIONAL UNIVERSE MODEL

    I believe the universe may exist in the shape of a bubble because our universe might be a folded oscillating dimension . Now imagine the singularity to be shaped like a ring which allows energy to pass from the "end of creation side" through the center of the ring to the "creation side". I believe The two planes oscillate due to the difference of matter on one side of the plane and only energy on the other. This is how a bubble could form because our three dimensional plane (our observable universe) exists on the "end of creation side" of all singularities in our bubble and the "creation side" of our universe (The non-observable side) would fold back onto the 3 dimensional side (creating a two sided three dimensional plane for the energy to oscillate from the inner regions to the outer most regions of our universe) This weak side of the plane holds the shape of the visible universe together to help form a bubble . The "creation side" and the "end of creation" side converge at the same point but on opposite sides of the ring within the singularity and the two planes are held together by its intense gravitational force. So as our planet gets closer to the singularity we would eventually cease to exist, because all matter would be transformed to its simplest state of energy. only energy created by the singularities can travel on the "creation side" of the plane. The energy would then begin to re-form into solid matter as it enters the outer edge of our bubble or plane and starts its journey back to the "end of creation" side of all singularities. This would be a never ending cycle of the universe.
    My e-mail address is [email protected]
×
×
  • Create New...