New Theory of Everything. 1/9. (The_Origin_Of_the_Infinity_Symbol:_The_Omnisphere)

[MrKorrazonCold]

An atom or group of atoms will contract and expand EMR, projecting their own spacetime (Time) at the square of the speed of light.

This is why the speed of light in a vacuum is the same for all observers, and is not relative to the movement of the observer.

Hugh Everetts parallel universes are individual wave-centers contracting+/-expanding within an infinite perpetual system. Overlapping and contributing less and less to each others in-wave amplitude with increasing distance causing redshift

[Angarluz]

@MrKorrazonCold If I have understood correctly, you have the intention to speak of dark energy as something magical? I'm sorry, but who are you to describe dark energy that way, when you talk about parallel universes as he speaks of a car that has in sight. Firstly, Everett described his interpretation rather as a metatheory and secondly, in the current knowledge there is no solid empirical basis for the existence of parallel universes... perhaps we should speak of magical parallel universes.

[MrKorrazonCold]

@Angarluz The parallel universes of Hugh Everett are here placed at right-angles to each other just like he said they would be. The only difference is they are individual spacetimes within our universe. Basically, "a particle is its own field." Spacetime is quantized into moments, only the frequency is relative at each moment of time. Time is inverse like multiplication and division or frequency and wavelength. Time cancels itself out, and the observer remains in the now.

[babyfungggg]

hmm.. i didn't watch through the whole video...but...so every matter has to spin in order to exist (as matter)? you said a particle spin quickly and earth spin slowly because of different mass.... but earth is made up of particles just like my computer. They why doesn't my computer spin in order to exist?

[Angarluz]

@babyfungggg This documentary deals with the existence of objects considered as dynamic objects. They base their existence on the spin. These objects are: photons, nucleons, atoms, planets, stars, solar systems and galaxies. However matter, ie, objects don't base their existence on the spin, but the spin of the atoms that compose it and the structures they form, because atoms are stable structures and creates stable structures (matter). >>>>

[Angarluz]

@Angarluz >>>> Yes earth is made up of particles just like your computer, but your computer is under the direct influence of the gravitational field of Earth, which forces it to move with Earth and stay glued to your table by effect of the gravitational field. Unlike your computer Earth was created itself and remember: only objects that are created itself and evolve have proper motion and this can only be done by dynamic objects and living beings.

[MrKorrazonCold]

@Angarluz All the natural laws we observe here on Earth depends on the existence of the matter elsewhere in the universe. Thus, if the stars and galaxies were not in the heavens, we could not exist.

[MrKorrazonCold]

@Angarluz Reality cannot be found except in One single source, because of the interconnection of all things with one another. ...I maintain also that substances, whether material or immaterial, cannot be conceived in their bare essence without any activity, activity being of the essence of substance in general. (Gottfried Leibniz, 1670)

Everything could be explained mathematically, but it wouldn't make any sense. Like calling a Beethoven symphony; A variation of wave-pressure! Einstein

[Angarluz]

@MrKorrazonCold Substances cannot be conceived in their bare essence without any activity, That's true and that it's the basis of my theory but if with "One source" Leibniz refers to God, then he has my full approval. Einstein also is absolutely right, basically the question is: what is more important... what we perceive or what we feel?

[aqouby]

@Angarluz You talk complete nonsense.

[Angarluz]

@aqouby First, I was not talking to you; and secondly, do you think is not what I say when I talk about dark energy? I'll tell you quite clearly, you know nothing about nature of dark energy; but I'll tell you more, you know nothing about dark matter; you know nothing about nature of spacetime and you know nothing about nature of gravity, because if you think that saying that gravity is a warping of spacetime you know what gravity is, then you know nothing at all about gravity; >>>>

[MrKorrazonCold]

@Angarluz There is no dark energy! The redshift is simply less wave interaction, less energy exchange with distance. Any smart guy can deduce this. Just take to or more overlapping light sphere's and see what happens when you pull them apart. There is no dark matter! When realizing it's a gravitational push black holes arn't really black as the inward motion of aggregates simply invert from inward to outward via the poles because there is no place else to go!

[MrKorrazonCold]

@MrKorrazonCold Gravity is simply an equal and opposite reaction to the inward absorption of positron in-wave's, as the observable spherical region of the universe forms a particles in-wave amplitude.

Just like water receding from the shoreline into the bass of the wave-particle (the greater the mass or energy forming+/-breaking at the crest) the greater the electron out-wave reaction. Thus no dark matter, "Its a graviational push", and not a magical spooky pull from a distance!.

[Angarluz]

@MrKorrazonCold Any smart guy like you who says that the universe isn't expanding, you're sure what you say? On the other hand, do you want to play to create a new theory about gravity only? And what about the unified field theory and unification of fundamental forces? Sorry but it's not time to create gravitational theories based on positrons or electrons with which we shall not get anywhere, it's time to unify fundamental forces and create a unified field theory.

[MrKorrazonCold]

@Angarluz Waves from all particles in the universe combine their intensities to form the wave-medium density (space) at each point of space. Spherical wave's of the in-wave positron+/-electron out-wave. Similar as observed in mesons, our personal experiences of time or interval of the current moment reaches its threshold when C is canceled out by its anti-C

Experiments show how conversion of matter into energy through its anti matter brings about gamma rays with exact opposite momentum

[MrKorrazonCold]

@Angarluz Of course I am sure, Galaxies are not flying away from one another at a million miles an hour!

Everything is made of electromagnetic-wave structures!

Christiaan Huygens found that many wave's from seperate wave sources combine to form a single wave-front from a distance. Termed; A Huygens combination of the separate wave's. This is where positron wave fronts come from all other matter spherically distributed around us and where the two wave's meet creates the particle affect.

[Angarluz]

@aqouby >>>> because that's just the tip of the iceberg; since the only thing you can do is to know the effect of deformation caused by the gravitational waves emitted by planets, stars or galaxies in spacetime; but you can't know the true causes and nature of said deformation never, because you have no idea how spacetime is or what is its nature. So off the pedestal and stop talking about what makes sense or nonsense because all you do is to take a stab in the dark.

[Typho0n86]

This voice puts me to sleep

[aqouby]

I'm sorry, I just finished watching these videos and you're completely mistaken. It's a good try, but you're lacking much of the fundamental physics that describe our Universe. It's mathematically invalid because when you have one of your components reach zero, then your uncertainty become infinite. There's 3 examples of this in your videos.

And having god as a source pretty much destroys the aspect of physicists taking this seriously. Mathematics would help your cause.

[Angarluz]

@aqouby Thanks for your comments and your advice, they are welcome. Zero may mean simply no space or time, ie, it does not generate space-time. As dark energy for example.

I know, physicists never taking this seriously.

[Angarluz]

@aqouby Ok, apparently scientists know what happens inside the stars, matter is produced through nuclear fusion and also know what happens after the Big Bang, matter is produced through certain reactions and interactions, and if they know all this about the matter, tell me why they don't know how to create stable atoms in high energy laboratories? That is, they don't really know how to create matter but claim to know how to create matter inside stars and after the Big Bang.

[aqouby]

@Angarluz What? I'm sorry but they do create stable atoms inside laboratories. You mean atoms like lead?

[Angarluz]

@aqouby Yes but there is a significant difference between transmute and create. In your universe atoms are transmuted but in my universe atoms are created one by one, suddenly and independently.

[aqouby]

@Angarluz That would imply that there be an energy density before the Big Bang. There's no reason to imply that other than your religious views.

[Angarluz]

@aqouby One question: do you know Spanish language?

[killajakethesnake]

@Angarluz the difference is that there are no known materials on earth that can withstand nuclear fusion which nears the scale of which it happens within a star. We can create the energy, but not be able to contain it.

[MrKorrazonCold]

@aqouby I'm sorry Angarluz, but what are these fundamental physics that describes the universe? Big bang, dark energy, gravitational pull, blackholes sucking from a distance, dark matter, multi-universes and dimensions. I think; there is to much magic in physics today.

I am sure, there is no spooky action from no-where !!!

Even ghosts have to come from somewhere, so the missing antimatter or symmetry of our universe can explain this potentual sequence forming the spacetime continuum.

[aqouby]

@MrKorrazonCold ? What? Well how about you define and prove ghosts, then you can start describing where they could come from.

[MrKorrazonCold]

@aqouby Firmilab discovered quanta such as mesons switching 3 trillion times per second from matter to antimatter. "Every instance of C has an anti-C."

"This explains the missing symmetry or antimatter in the universe and is closely related to the arbitrary choice of emitter and absorber in the Wheeler - Feynman Time - Symmetry theory."

Where the unperturbed time T in the uncertainty principle is the required time or cycle for quanta to exist enfolding+/-unfolding moments of spacetime.

[aqouby]

@MrKorrazonCold ? I know that, so what? What Fermilab found out has nothing to do with the nonsense this man is throwing in his videos. And you'd have to clarify on an antiparticle of a photon, because from what I know, since it has spin 0 and is massless, its antiparticle is itself.

[aqouby]

@MrKorrazonCold And your last sentence didn't quite get to me either.

[aqouby]

@MrKorrazonCold And I think you're mixing quotes.

[Angarluz]

@MrKorrazonCold Don't worry, it's normal to have mistake because to talk about new concepts we have nothing but old words. We don't know what reality is. Better to have an open mind and be vigilant. Personally nor do I believe or disbelieve in ghost but if you're interested in knowing which is responsible for the space time "continuum", perhaps you should seek about dark energy.

[MrKorrazonCold]

@Angarluz, There is no dark energy because the universe is not expanding!

The parallel universes of Hugh Everett are individual spherical standing wave-centers within our universe overlapping thus contributing less and less to each others in-wave amplitude with increasing distance.

Basically a particle is its own field. So there is less wave interaction, less energy exchange causing red shift with distance within an infinite perpetual system.

Not this big bang or magical dark energy.

[Angarluz]

@MrKorrazonCold There is nothing static in the universe. Everything moves expands or contracts. Why do the characteristics of the entire universe will be different to the qualities of universe we observe every day? Any quality or characteristic in the universe is limited by space or time as is the case with the objects in our reality. Nor is there anything that is perpetual or infinite. >>>>

[Angarluz]

@MrKorrazonCold >>>> Since it would be like saying that there are objects with absolute qualities in the universe and that is not possible, but you're right in saying, basically a particle is its own field. I have a documentary where I talk about dark energy but is in Spanish, is titled: El universo: un universo-estrella.

[praisesteps]

Love this video. Do you have an APA reference for it? In other words, what is the source?

[Angarluz]

@praisesteps Thanks for your kindly words :)

God is the source. I'm just trying to know how he does things.

Peace and love.

[orchidswholesale]

@Angarluz so it basicly is yor fantasy not backed with anything researched and your fantasy is backed up by the bibel.............to me such nonsense :)

[0Zore]

"Rhythm, Timing, Expanse, Understanding."