scientists and a glimpse of theory making
in [Math]
|
Prev: converting "pi base" to "e base" Re: Euclidean geom = Elliptic unioned Hyperbolic #4.33 & #249 Correcting Math & Atom Totality
Next: STATIC UNIVERSE: EINSTEINIANA'S NEW MONEY-SPINNER
From: Archimedes Plutonium on 31 Jul 2010 01:41 Osher Doctorow wrote: > From Osher Doctorow > > I've also gotten some arguably interesting results tying in related 2 > or 1/2 ratios and also 0.43 to 0.488 ratios in my last few posts in my > Quantum Gravity thread. > > Osher Doctorow Supporting evidence comes from observational evidence of those exoplanets which Oldershaw is referring to, whereas yours is what? your brain thinking and hence not allied with any factual data. It is the observational factual data that separates the Big Bang as a fake from the Atom Totality. Osher, your posts seem to always lack the allying of factual observed data from opinion-ideas. Ideas are just opinions, Osher, when those ideas are not pinned down to a theory. For example, your Quantum Gravity is all merely opinion because you never offered a larger theory to pin-down gravity. You see, in the Atom Totality, gravity is what space is as Dirac's ocean of positrons which are positively charged and since all matter is of the electrons of the 231Pu Atom Totality are attracted by the positron space. I let the Atom Totality explain gravity, while sitting back in a lounger sipping ice tea, whereas you have to break into a sweat and work long hours trying to get gravity out of a Big Bang, since you never replaced the Big Bang. Give you an example, when I first discovered the Atom Totality, it was a allying of factual data with thinking. The factual data was that the electron-dot-cloud has a Born Intrepretation of its dots spread out and if you look at the night sky of stars they are a Born Intrepretation of where those stars lie. So then, apply thinking to this and come up with the Universe is one big atom. Your posts, Osher, are mostly mental thinking, not backed with much logic and hardly ever any factual data. Sorry to sound harsh on you Osher, but I think you are wasting your time. Out of all your posts, Osher, do you think there is anything new, real, and truthful? Nearly everyone in science believes that new science discoveries of importance are due to a person with persistence and drive and smartness. Whereas if the Atom Totality is true, then every major science discovery is made not by smart persons with superior brain power, but is superdetermined who will make the discoveries. It is not a matter of thinking, but being fated to do the new discoveries. I discovered the Atom Totality, not because I am smart or persistent or had an excellent education. I discovered it because I was fated by higher powers to have those thoughts and actions and deeds. Were you, Osher, fated to discover any new science? From you voluminous postings, it appears the answer is no. And another thing about science discovery. It is not going to happen if you crank on the Internet with posts, that you will perchance find a new important idea. In my case, I discovered the Atom Totality and then decided to post on the Internet. If I had never discovered the Atom Totality, the internet community would never have heard of Ludwig van Ludvig. So the important thing is to make the discovery outside the Internet, and then use the Internet to broadcast the idea. You seem to do the opposite and feel that by chain posting that somehow you will make some new discovery. I rather think not. Like I said, I believe Newton was fated, as well as Faraday and Maxwell, as Bohr and as Dirac. And another thing, Osher, you can evaluate or judge a person's science abilities or qualities by who he/she esteems. Nearly everyone posting or reading this post of mine in science esteems Einstein. This tells me they have a tiny science mind. John Bell, who few have ever heard of was far more a scientist then ever was Einstein. In fact the giant of the 20th century physics was Dirac. Dirac's legacy is just starting to bloom. Dirac was so close to the Atom Totality, with his laws of large numbers and his positron ocean and his new radioactivities. So why bother, Osher, with all these posts of yours when none of them has any new theories. What exactly are you pushing, other than your opinions. A theory is not a theory unless it ties together alot of obersvations and experiments. Ideas are not better than opinions when they are not allied with a theory. So Osher, in my opinion, your posts are all opinions, and not science. Archimedes Plutonium http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium/ whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies |