Go Back   Physics Help Forum > Physics Forums > Philosophy of Physics

Philosophy of Physics Philosophy of Physics Forum - Philosophical questions about our universe

Like Tree7Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old Apr 21st 2019, 08:24 AM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 73
Missing anti matter

I found the missing anti matter. After realizing Big bang repeats on ever larger scales with new particles forming at the knots of the large scale structure. I see galaxies flying in - these them selves behave like particles with a point particle and a wave.

So it happens again, if I throw a little extra mass in every area the size of the visable universe over a large area and then do the same without the little extra - I have the basics of the start of Big bang it all repeats. To say it will keep repeating is to say it has forever. At this point we can say its infinite in size and time - what created this is up to you and where religion comes in so take your pick and respect the rest.

All this leaves me to ask what is the most basic paticle - its a black hole. They can come in all sizes but at certain times Phases there may not be time to have formed the intermediate black hole we search for in any large numbers. I came to the conclusion that it gives mass to matter, this fundimental particle. in big bang the space is there the mass is a supper fine mist, The important fact is if I shrink the universe the space is there the black holes can be smaller and more of them. In a black hole matter falls in through the space leaving it behind the forces break down to free the base particles -which ultimatly break down to small black holes to fall through the reamaining space.

I end up with Mass outside spacetime. Therefore matter is a combination of Mass outside spacetime and spacetime in varing complecities. That is interesting. So what is it (mass outside spacetime) the statment itself says there is something else - How about antispacetime, Mass is the force of two universes touching. The area they touch is the black hole. If I cut a slice through a black hole the middle is nothing its cancelled out.

Matter is mass outside spacetime and spacetime so there is connections everywhere between the two and the antiverse does not break my hypothesis of everything because if I were on the other side - it looks the exact same and the anti me is in the same place. I don't need specific location to make a universe of mass outside spacetime and anti mass outside ant spacetime.

They just took a pic of the god particle That which gives mass to matter and I found the missing Antimatter.

The connections will grow in size and therefore strength by pooling when left to gravity the forces in common physics keep matter as common physics from cancelling out till gravity becomes to strong. So always less connections moving forward but more larger ones - it evolves and does not go back - any where there is matter there is a connection and anti matter.
fligmin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22nd 2019, 05:03 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 341
Sounds like you took too many hallucinogens.
benit13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22nd 2019, 06:05 AM   #3
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 73
It may sound like it but I did not. I know I got no math as Im more a thinker then a physicist but the thinking has built over years, I know im right. Till you can either find a glaring error or put forward the answer or set of answers that explain dark matter Dark energy and an increased expansion rate and now find antimatter. I think in the end it will be proven im right. This is what it is Infinite and repeating (building on what it already did)

I find the answer all to easy but physics is determined its so complicated that it is looking strait past the answer -Ist to simple - Think its needs peeps like me to throw it out here. Get out of the box.

There is a number of threads in the hypothesis section of the naked scientist forums (this topic is better written there) you will find 5 or 6 other topics - whats inside a black hole led to this

Last edited by fligmin; Apr 22nd 2019 at 12:05 PM.
fligmin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22nd 2019, 12:10 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 341
So... what do you want?

If you want some feedback, here's my suggestion: go and study the literature for about 6 months. Once you do that, you can then look back at this post and laugh it off as just a bit of wild speculation for fun (Deepak Chopra would be proud).

Also, I'd highly recommend learning mathematics and a programming language. It's virtually impossible to solve physics problems without those skills. It takes a lot of time, but they're extremely useful and it can be fun to learn too
topsquark likes this.
benit13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22nd 2019, 12:46 PM   #5
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 73
I actually like feedback. I don't mean to be offensive either. I would like to know why it sounds like I had to much hallucinogens though. Math courses - to late in life for me. I here your point and Point taken. But I came for help and since I do have brain farts - the hope if I Had one its spotted like woddy did and it helped me Much. I was actually not fishing to simply strike conversation for better or worse, Looking for flaws in my idea (obvious simple ones) OR if none to make those who can't find the answer to those things think different.

Yes you found an obvious flaw in me - one I try to work on. I can admit my flaw.

What Im look for is a flaw in the thinking of my idea so I may change my thinking till I find what works.

I think I found the fundamental flaw in Physics. The god particle. Also At this point in time those who study the small need to look up to go further down and those who study what's up need to look past physics going down to solve further going up If that Makes sense. Big bang is happening again above your head - Simple change in thinking Without break the big bang but simply fitting it in Find crazy answers.
fligmin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 23rd 2019, 03:42 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 341
Okay... here goes...

Originally Posted by fligmin View Post
I found the missing anti matter. After realizing Big bang repeats on ever larger scales
There are hypotheses that suggest repeated big bang/big crunch cycles, but there's no evidence to test them, so it's not considered "theory". Therefore there's nothing to "realize" here. If your hypothesis requires this as a prerequisite, you should state your assumptions...

"Assuming that the big bang/big crunch cycle hypothesis is true, ..."

with new particles forming at the knots of the large scale structure.
What new particles? What knots? What large-scale structure? You need to explain what you mean here.

I see galaxies flying in
So... in canonical big bang theory, galaxies don't appear until much later, after matter-radiation decoupling. It is more of a result of the big bang rather than an active participant. Your theory now has them in the early universe... How does this affect galactic and chemical evolution models?

If your hypothesis has early galaxies, you need to explain how they are formed and what they look like.

- these them selves behave like particles with a point particle and a wave.
You can imagine this to be the case if you like, but until your theory has predictive power, there's no need to worry over details about how to treat the various entities in your model. I doubt that treating a galaxy like a quantum particle is going to give you any interesting results since it's a macroscopic object (!)

So it happens again, if I throw a little extra mass in every area the size of the visable universe over a large area and then do the same without the little extra - I have the basics of the start of Big bang it all repeats.
Uh... so you're artificially adding (presumably baryonic) mass for every big bang cycle...

To say it will keep repeating is to say it has forever. At this point we can say its infinite in size and time - what created this is up to you and where religion comes in so take your pick and respect the rest.
Well, your theory assumes big bang/big crunch cycles, which explains cosmogenesis, so there's actually no room for religious theories in your hypothesis.

All this leaves me to ask what is the most basic paticle - its a black hole.
This is old news. Everyone knows that a lot of matter in a small space creates something like a singularity, so it's tempting to leap to black hole theories to try and explain cosmology. Whatever the state of the early universe is (we don't know) it's very likely to be different from the supermassive black holes, which can have things like x-ray jets and accretion discs.

They can come in all sizes but at certain times Phases there may not be time to have formed the intermediate black hole we search for in any large numbers. I came to the conclusion that it gives mass to matter, this fundimental particle.
Eh? This makes no sense. Matter, by definition, is stuff that has mass. If something doesn't have mass, it isn't matter (radiation or something else?). Is something being created that isn't matter and then it has mass assigned to it?

in big bang the space is there the mass is a supper fine mist, The important fact is if I shrink the universe the space is there the black holes can be smaller and more of them. In a black hole matter falls in through the space leaving it behind the forces break down to free the base particles -which ultimatly break down to small black holes to fall through the reamaining space.

I end up with Mass outside spacetime. Therefore matter is a combination of Mass outside spacetime and spacetime in varing complecities. That is interesting. So what is it (mass outside spacetime) the statment itself says there is something else - How about antispacetime, Mass is the force of two universes touching. The area they touch is the black hole. If I cut a slice through a black hole the middle is nothing its cancelled out.
There have been theories that have proposed mass influx, through some unknown means, and then redistribution throughout the universe. Those were found to be proven false however because they don't predict the cosmic microwave background radiation (CMB) or the expansion rate of the Universe. For your theory to have any weight, you need to also predict those observables.

They just took a pic of the god particle That which gives mass to matter and I found the missing Antimatter.
What picture is this? Why does the confirmation of the existence of the Higgs boson have anything to do with the matter-anti-matter asymmetry problem?

The connections will grow in size and therefore strength by pooling when left to gravity the forces in common physics keep matter as common physics from cancelling out till gravity becomes to strong. So always less connections moving forward but more larger ones - it evolves and does not go back - any where there is matter there is a connection and anti matter.
Riiiight.

EDIT: I just remembered that there is an existing hypothesis that there might have been an interaction with a separate universe at the beginning of the big bang where all the anti-matter produced in symmetric pair-production went. However, that's currently untestable, so it gets put in the bucket of untestable hypotheses along with all the other stuff.


Like I said earlier, it's mostly word salad. But hey, speculation is fun.

If you actually want to make a decent attempt at coming up with new hypotheses, you need to at least read up on:

1. Canonical big bang models (Friedmann model first, then perhaps Lambda-CDM, but it's heavy going)
2. Cosmic microwave background radiation
3. Galactic evolution and morphology
4. Chemical evolution

And other stuff too. There's lots of observables that can be used to constrain cosmological models and there's good reasons why the best model we currently have is the Lambda-CDM model.
topsquark likes this.

Last edited by benit13; Apr 23rd 2019 at 05:43 AM.
benit13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 23rd 2019, 06:35 AM   #7
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 73
Thanks for your break down - some of it will give me things to think about. Some of it you not looking realavalisticly about - (galaxies flying in to early) your still looking at it like a galaxy rather than a particle and then asking yourself if I shrunk it down(not really but by pulling back to look at it)


The black hole is in a well to it everything happens instantly. So if I repeat BB on a larger scale The galaxy will appear to be flying in real fast (gravity well of the knot in the large scale structure will slow time for it as it pools) So trillions of years down the road looking back to the knot it happens fast, to stuff out of the gravity well slow.

So if I speed up the galaxy looking at it as the small spinning fast and it does not spin right (right) can it look like a particle.

I have to notice something don't fit then ask why - put forward Ideas then test - im developing my idea and trying to understand it and understand what I need to work out.

Thanks for lots of points. Wish I had time to go through them completely this AM. Some seem super valid for me to think on some seem trollish just TOO!

Read my full idea At naked scientist forums.

I have to make an assumption to then test it - Right.
fligmin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 23rd 2019, 06:48 AM   #8
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 73
I figured that I need to understand what this Black hole was As my first most basic bit.

Can this be said to be true - A black hole is Mass outside Space time. Am I correct in this statement.

if its my basic bit or not yet to be determined but can it be explained as Mass outside spacetime( I know it could be anything even unicorns but it is Mass outside spacetime which means THERE is something outside this universe.

I conclude its different then a reverse off bb as the space is not there - everything fell through

Last edited by fligmin; Apr 23rd 2019 at 07:00 AM.
fligmin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 23rd 2019, 06:56 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 341
Originally Posted by fligmin View Post
Thanks for your break down - some of it will give me things to think about.
I'm glad

Some of it you not looking realavalisticly about - (galaxies flying in to early) your still looking at it like a galaxy rather than a particle and then asking yourself if I shrunk it down(not really but by pulling back to look at it)
The canonical big bang theories do not treat the early universe as a galaxy, particle or anything else. The early universe is a unique thing with a unique treatment. Some of the existing models have explicit relativistic considerations, but some are just non-Newtonian (neither relativistic nor Newtonian).

The black hole is in a well to it everything happens instantly.
Eh?

So if I repeat BB on a larger scale The galaxy will appear to be flying in real fast (gravity well of the knot in the large scale structure will slow time for it as it pools)
What galaxy are you talking about? Like I said in the previous post, galaxies only form later in the big bang model... the early universe is not a galaxy.

These are basic definitions... things you'll understand if you read a cosmology book... hint hint

So trillions of years down the road looking back to the knot it happens fast, to stuff out of the gravity well slow.
Trillions of years? The time of the big bang is about 13.4 billion years (~100 times shorter than a trillion years).

What is this knot? Could it be a translation issue? That might explain why your posts sound so weird.

So if I speed up the galaxy looking at it as the small spinning fast and it does not spin right (right) can it look like a particle.
No. Galaxies don't behave anything like any other normal object on Earth. If you're interested in the dynamics of galaxies, then I recommend a book called Galactic Dynamics by Binney and Merryfield.

I have to notice something don't fit then ask why - put forward Ideas then test - im developing my idea and trying to understand it and understand what I need to work out.

Thanks for lots of points. Wish I had time to go through them completely this AM. Some seem super valid for me to think on some seem trollish just TOO!

Read my full idea At naked scientist forums.

I have to make an assumption to then test it - Right.
No problem. However, I think you have *a lot* of work to do. Career physicsts who study full-time on cosmology can't solve these problems, which should give you an idea of how difficult these problems are. We (you nor I) cannot just solve these problems by pontificating and speculating about miscellaneous structures composed of celestial entities. The actual studies are very complex...
topsquark likes this.

Last edited by benit13; Apr 23rd 2019 at 06:59 AM.
benit13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 23rd 2019, 07:12 AM   #10
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 73
"So it happens again, if I throw a little extra mass in every area the size of the visible universe over a large area and then do the same without the little extra - I have the basics of the start of Big bang it all repeats.

Uh... so you're artificially adding (presumably baryonic) mass for every big bang cycle..."

Not artificially adding - Basic (assumption) Straightforward thinking. The space around me is not uniform therefore the space I can not see must be similar (we all know that which we see extends past our ability to see) How far is the question. To think each area the size of the universe will hold the exact same mass in the exact same distribution is absurd.
fligmin is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

  Physics Help Forum > Physics Forums > Philosophy of Physics

Tags
anti, matter, missing



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Physics Forum Discussions
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Anti matter: a topic of both old and new htam9876 Philosophy of Physics 29 Jun 28th 2018 05:13 AM
How does light interact, and travel through Solid matter as matter gets thicker, in w timemachine2 Light and Optics 0 Mar 4th 2016 04:27 PM
Gravity and Anti-matter topsquark Physics 3 Apr 2nd 2014 12:54 PM
Am I right or am I missing something? zenctheo Energy and Work 6 Apr 15th 2008 06:26 AM


Facebook Twitter Google+ RSS Feed