Search FQXi


If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at forums@fqxi.org with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Forum Home
Introduction
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

Posts by the author are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.

By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use

 RSS feed | RSS help
RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

Douglas W Lipp: on 10/3/10 at 1:29am UTC, wrote Coney Island Green - continued - see all posts Get This - "Another Link" ...

Douglas W Lipp: on 9/14/10 at 12:08pm UTC, wrote To be pieced together with CIG Theory : The dissapearance of length along...

Dov Henis: on 8/25/10 at 6:40am UTC, wrote Natural Selection Derives From Cosmic Expansion Two suggested editorial...

Douglas W Lipp: on 8/19/10 at 11:56am UTC, wrote Douglas W Lipp THE CONEY ISLAND GREEN THEORY (continued) Further To CIG...

Douglas W Lipp: on 6/6/10 at 13:47pm UTC, wrote CIG Theory - a continuation To clarify the above post wherein it is...

Douglas W Lipp: on 6/6/10 at 0:00am UTC, wrote The Coney Island Green Theory - continuation of the thought process... To...

Douglas W Lipp: on 5/31/10 at 13:52pm UTC, wrote In context with all the other stuff that has been posted as regards Coney...

Douglas W Lipp: on 5/9/10 at 1:19am UTC, wrote continuation of Lipp - The Coney Island Green Theory. Further to the Coney...



FQXi FORUM
August 17, 2017

ARTICLE: Out of the Darkness [back to article]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Georgina Parry wrote on Mar. 29, 2009 @ 01:11 GMT
In my opinion dark energy is unnecessary speculation. It attempts to give an explanation for a phenomenon that is a subjective construct based on observation of electromagnetic radiation.The assumption of expansion being based on red shift of that radiation.It is not direct observation of the objective material universe but an image that is a distorted relic.

Let us say that the material source of the radiation and the material observer are both at 4th dimensional position A, Both progress afore that is further forward along the 4th dimension.The radiation emitted at A is travelling both through 3D space and along the 4th dimension.When the radiation is intercepted by the observer at position B, both material source and observer are at B but the observer sees source at A. The observer has moved further away in time and thus space from the apparent position of source but in objective reality has not and will be getting closer due to gravitational attraction.This may be overly simplistic but is an attempt to show that there is a difference between the subjective reality constructed from the radiation and the material reality.In subjective reality the image is stretched out in objective reality matter comes together due to gravity to give rise to increasing complexity of structure.Dark energy is therefore unnecessary as a concept.

If the 4th dimension is recognised as spatio-energetic rather than time, matter afore along the 4th dimension that is continuous with the galaxy but not visible from 3D space will exert gravitational pull but will be un-seeable. This can account for the additional mass needed given the angular momentum of the galaxy.I.e. this is the dark matter.In this model a black hole can be considered as a gravity well that is so deep that it extends into afore space.This model will fit with general relativity.

report post as inappropriate


Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Mar. 30, 2009 @ 14:58 GMT
The newly published article entitled: The Dream Fundamentally Balances and Unifies Gravity and Electromagnetism properly addresses these questions.

The 3 to 1 ratio of space dimensions is united with time (also one third); and this is all consistent with balancing and unifying electromagnetism and gravity within the totality (i.e., space, time, being, experience, thought, etc.) of experience.

The dream fundamentally balances and unifies gravity and electromagnetism (consistent with time and space representations thereof as well). Note that I say in the article that the self represents, forms, and experiences comprehensive approximations of experience in general. This is, moreover, consistent with all that I have said.

Even if it is not the way that many would have approached or envisioned it, admit it when someone is correct; and keep an open mind.

Frank Martin DiMeglio (author)

http://radicalacademy.com/studentrefphilfmd13.htm

report post as inappropriate


Georgina Parry wrote on Apr. 2, 2009 @ 01:12 GMT
I have taken a look at the link. I regret that I can not admit that you are correct. Despite having an open mind, that is able to spot correlation between various other theories and how parts of some can fit into others. Sometimes it is just a question of how something is described, rather than an actual physical difference. Or it may be a question of how the problem has been approached that gives a particular solution. Your work appears to show the way in which your particular mind approaches the experience of subjective reality and finds creative connections between facets of that reality.It does not correlate to my own experience and therefore I am not able to verify your conclusions.

report post as inappropriate


Uncle Al wrote on Apr. 4, 2009 @ 01:43 GMT
Big Bang with an intense chiral pseudoscalar vacuum background field interactive only in the massed sector. It dilutes to power cosmic inflation, select matter over antimatter, and source the parity-violating Weak interaction. Present-day residual biases biological homochirality (chiral protein L-amino acids and chiral D-sugars).

If the vacuum is a left foot in the massed sector, socks and left shoes are not diagnostic - only right shoes. Opposite parity atomic mass distributions will violate the Equivalence Principle. This is testable as a parity Eotvos experiment opposing chemically and macroscopically identical, solid single crystal test masses in enantiomorphic space groups P3(1)1 and P3(2)21: quartz, berlinite and analogues, cinnabar, tellurium selenium...

Equivalence Principle violation falsifies general relativity (EP postulated), perturbational string theory (BRST invariance postulated), and conservation of angular momentum (anisotropic vacuum and Noether's theorem). For all that, its sole interaction with extreme opposite parity atomic mass distributions prevents contradiction of any prior observation in any venue at any scale. EM is, of course, inert.

A parity Eotvos experiment decides it all within 90 days to at least 5x10^(-14) difference/average sensitivity. Somebody should look.

report post as inappropriate


Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Apr. 9, 2009 @ 01:22 GMT
Does your "reply" make any sense at all Georgina? Who are you kidding? I have definitively proven (in detail and with specifics) that the dream fundamentally balances and unifies gravity and electromagnetism. The evidence that I have offered is overwhelming.

I have even shown the 3 to 1 relation in BOTH time (one third) and space (i.e., the three to one ratio of space dimensions).

report post as inappropriate


Georgina Parry wrote on Apr. 30, 2009 @ 10:44 GMT
Frank Martin,

It is fascinating how different minds interpret the input they receive and can formulate very different explanations that work from that personal perspective.

I am interested by the correlation between ideas that have been independently formulated. It is often possible to see how different minds attempt to explain similar things in different ways but the underlying meaning is the same or has similarity. Sometimes there is no readily apparent correlation.

I am not kidding anyone.I see things from my own perspective, that is from within my own subjective reality. That reality is due to my own sensory input, individual brain structure, function and thinking style, which in turn is a result of genetic endowment, upbringing, education, environment,diet, mental health, no drug use etc.We do not share the same subjective reality, that is we do not have the same individual experience of reality. My reply made sense to me. Your ideas make sense to you.

report post as inappropriate


Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on May. 12, 2009 @ 15:20 GMT
The integrated extensiveness of thought is improved in the truly superior mind. That is important. Also, astronomical observations are interactive creations of thought to a significant extent. This is inseparable from making a larger space smaller (and a smaller space larger), as in the dream. This explains much. Dreams make thought more like sensory experience in general, thereby reducing the OVERALL (or generally) integrated extensiveness of thought. Conscious and unconscious experience are necessarily interactive, thereby limiting the understanding.

report post as inappropriate


Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on May. 25, 2009 @ 17:41 GMT
Georgina, let's speak truthfully, meaningfully, sensibly, and realistically, ok?

When someone is correct on something of very fundamental importance and relevance, it should be admitted to. This is very big news!

THE DREAM FUNDAMENTALLY BALANCES AND UNIFIES GRAVITY AND ELECTROMAGNETISM

The article is clear, and yet deep. Here are two brief summaries of the article that should help facilitate your understanding of it:

1) Dreams improve upon the integrated extensiveness of experience and thought. This is what is described by the addition of a fourth dimension of space that unites Einstein's theory of gravity and Maxwell's theory of electromagnetism/light. I have proven (in detail and with specifics) that the dream fundamentally unifies gravity and electromagnetism. With the fourth dimension of space being added, what is then described is thought that is more like sensory experience in general. The dream makes thought more like sensory experience in general (including gravity and electromagnetism). The ability of thought to describe or reconfigure sense is ultimately dependent upon the extent to which thought is similar to sense. Note that dreams involve a fundamental integration and spreading of being and experience at the mid-range of feeling between thought and sense. The totality of experience/the system has to be considered.

2) The ability of thought to describe or reconfigure sense is ultimately dependent upon the extent to which thought is similar to sense. Dreams make thought more like sensory experience in general (including gravity and electromagnetism). Moreover, dreams involve a fundamental integration and spreading of being and experience at the mid-range of feeling between thought and sense. The dream is the fundamental unification of gravity and electromagnetism.

Questions anyone? Thanks for your kind consideration.

report post as inappropriate


Ivan Zhogin wrote on Jul. 23, 2009 @ 07:14 GMT
I wonder which variant is correct:

(1) in text: ... encouraging my interest in the measurable.

(2) in the inset: ... encouraging my interest in the IMmeasurable.

(It looks like a deep truth..)

report post as inappropriate


Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Jul. 25, 2009 @ 04:40 GMT
Gravity and electromagnetism/light are fundamental to life. They are unified in the dream. Gravity and electromagnetism are inseparable from the integrated extensiveness of being, experience, and thought. Note that the baby undergoes gravitational expansion from within the mother's body. Small and large are united in the dream. The fundamental unification of gravity and electromagnetism in the dream is why there is no fatigue, tiredness, or lack of energy therein -- indeed, dreams involve a fundamental integration AND spreading of being, thought, and experience. Electromagnetism is not only associated with extremes of size (e.g., photons and the sun, in comparison with the earth and ordinary space), but also with extremes of gravity (gravitational influence). Dreams have everything to do with how a larger space is made smaller and how a smaller space is made larger. This is in keeping with variable distances involving vision in the dream -- again, the aspect of integration and spreading.

report post as inappropriate


Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Aug. 1, 2009 @ 01:11 GMT
Hi Glenn. This "dark energy" discussion is way off. The dream unifies gravity and electromagnetism. The dream makes thought more like sensory experience in general. Astronomical observations are, to a significant extent, interactive creations of thought. The constant energy/lighting of the dream balances and unifies gravity and electromagnetism. Note that dreams occur at the mid-range of feeling between thought and sense. Dreams involve a fundamental integration and spreading of being and experience (including thought). Gravity and electromagnetism improve upon (and are fundamental to) the integrated extensiveness of being and experience (including space and thought). The dream is the answer. The self represents, forms, and experiences a comprehensive approximation of experience in general.

I have demonstrated extension in time (at one third) -- as that is consistent with extension in space (3 to 1 space dimensions). The dream is AT ONCE both a larger/additive and a [relatively] smaller space, and this is consistent with unifying large and small -- and with the fact that there is no fatigue, tiredness, or lack of energy in the dream as well. Even the baby grows at/near the center of the body. The ability of thought to describe or reconfigure sensory experience is ultimately dependent upon the extent to which thought is similar to sensory experience. The dream makes thought more like sensory experience in general (including gravity and electromagnetism).



My idea deserves serious consideration as one of the contenders that you mention. See: The Dream Fundamentally Balances and Unifies Gravity and Electromagnetism. Please reply.

Also, it is Newton, not Einstein who is the "ultimate physics heavyweight".

There is no doubt that if I was a popular and know physicist, I wouldn't have had to write this post in the first place. Let's speak the truth here.

report post as inappropriate


Dov Henis wrote on Aug. 19, 2009 @ 14:58 GMT
The Basic Implications Of E=Total[m(1 + D)]

a recapitulation

A. Its essential statement

"Extrapolation of the expansion of the universe backwards in time to the early hot dense "Big Bang" phase, using general relativity, yields an infinite density and temperature at a finite time in the past. At age 10^-35 seconds the Universe begins with a cataclysm that generates space and...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate


Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Aug. 19, 2009 @ 23:57 GMT
Attention all FQXi members, as this is very important:

Dreams unify gravity and electromagnetism/light by involving what is [the gravitational AND electromagnetic/light] mid-range of FEELING between thought and sense. Gravity and electromagnetism/light are both attractive and repulsive in the dream.

Dreams improve upon memory and understanding by increasing (or adding to) the integrated extensiveness of being and experience (including thought) in and with time. The sense of relative familiarity involving dream experience is associated with the improvement of understanding and memory therein. Dreams and memory integrate experience; and both add to the extensiveness of experience (including thought) as well, while involving a [relative] reduction in the totality of experience. The ability of thought to describe or reconfigure sensory experience is ultimately dependent upon the extent to which thought is similar to sensory experience. The dream makes thought more like sensory experience in general (including gravity and electromagnetism).

Dr. Christian Corda has the common sense/smarts to agree that this is so, and he is correct:

The Dream Fundamentally Balances and Unifies Gravity and Electromagnetism

Gravity and electromagnetism/light unified folks, definitively. Einstein would agree. Go spread the word.

report post as inappropriate


Peter Jackson wrote on Aug. 21, 2009 @ 17:21 GMT
I disagree with Georgina that considering dark energy is unnecessary. It may even be key. The basic problem with SR is the quantum field, the third reference frame 'ether' that destroys equivalence. A field of dark energy, from which dark matter particles propagate, is currently a favourite model. We don't quite know the mechanism yet but we do know the exchange rate, which hasn't changed since it was discovered 100 years ago; The mass x CxC.

There is an inductive background dependent model that includes a basic mechanism for this and seems to work (and follows Birkhoffs Theorem!) but this part of it is not yet fully developed, and not published. But, for the moment, and to better understand the issues resolved, consider at once the basic 'light clock' demonstration of SR, Dilation, and the 1999 Hubble confirmation of the superluminal gas jet velocity of Galaxy M87. Any ideas??

report post as inappropriate


Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Aug. 23, 2009 @ 20:18 GMT
Glenn Starkman. This is a formal request for you to consider my ideas as well, as I have clearly and definitively demonstrated (in detail and with specifics) the union of gravity and electromagnetism, as follows:

To think that the union between Einstein's theory of gravity and electromagnetism (i.e., Maxwell's theory of light) is not plainly and significantly obvious/manifest in our experience is one of the greatest blunders regarding lack of common sense that I have ever seen.

Electromagnetism involves extremes of feeling, brightness, visibility, size, and energy. Gravity and electromagnetism/light are united at the [gravitational] mid-range of feeling between thought and sense. When scale is balanced, gravity is repulsive and attractive as electromagnetic energy/light and feeling.

Demonstrate gravity as attractive and repulsive -- in keeping with relatively constant (and proper) lighting, energy, and brightness -- in a space that is at once understood to be larger and smaller. The space must also be invisible and visible at once.

You now have electromagnetism/light as gravitational space. Space manifesting as BOTH gravitational AND electromagnetic/light energy. (Constant energy as well.)

The union of gravity and electromagnetism/light in a fourth spatial dimension completes, balances, and extends Einstein's theory. It demonstrates thought that is more like sensory experience in general. The ability of thought to describe or reconfigure sense is ultimately dependent upon the integrated extensiveness of thought, experience, and being. Indeed, the ability of thought to describe or reconfigure sense is ultimately dependent upon the extent to which thought is similar to sensory experience.

Dreams make thought more like sensory experience in general. Dreams involve a fundamental integration and spreading of being and experience (including thought) at the mid-range of feeling between thought and sense.

This entire post is describing dream experience. Dreams demonstrate space manifesting as energy.

Electromagnetism/light and gravity are fundamental to life. They are united in the dream. The totality of experience has to be considered.

See: The Dream Fundamentally Balances and Unifies Gravity and Electromagnetism

http://radicalacademy.com/studentrefphilfmd1
3.htm

Author Frank Martin DiMeglio

Glenn, please reply. Thanks.

report post as inappropriate


Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Aug. 30, 2009 @ 19:22 GMT
Dear Glenn Starkman, where are you? There is no excluding my ideas from consideration in your decision. Let's keep it fair, honest, and credible.

Witness the following:

This enire post has very serious and direct bearing upon the authenticity/limits of General Relativity.

What of the fact that astronomical observations may necessarily be reducing/isolating/narrowing our...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate


Dougla W Lipp wrote on Oct. 5, 2009 @ 23:58 GMT
LIPP

“THE CONEY ISLAND GREEN THEORY”

A Summary of the Years (a technical paper)

I. A Very Brief Overview ……………………………………………………
….. 2

II. The Concepts ……………………………………………………
…………….… 7

III. The Philosophical Theory: Matter x Time = Space...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate


Douglas W Lipp wrote on Oct. 6, 2009 @ 10:22 GMT
continuation of Lipp - The Coney Island Green Theory

The large heads on the aliens small bodies are due to our astronauts having to lay flat down in their saucers. Lorentz expansion, in this case as the craft slows, rather than contraction along the x-axis through mis-design, the alien (our own astronauts!) heads expand while the lower extremities are smaller. These are true known effects...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate


Douglas W Lipp wrote on Oct. 6, 2009 @ 10:27 GMT
Do not erase Lipp's work above until it has been read and attempted to be understood.

On the surface it appears crazy and the author presents the theory in an unusual maner, however, it must be read in its entirety to grasp its full meaning. The theory is to be believed, and can be experimentally verified!

report post as inappropriate


reasonmclucus wrote on Oct. 20, 2009 @ 08:00 GMT
When are physicists going to use their heads and realize that there are two types of substances that cannot be seen. Dark substances cannot be seen directly because they do not reflect or emit light. They can be seen indirectly if they come between a light source and the observer because they block light. Transparent substances cannot be seen because light passes through them.

Some transparent substances may be seen if they reflect or refract light but that may depend upon the angle at which light hits them and the location of the observer.

A transparent aether with mass could provide additional mass for the universe.

The red shift of distant galaxies is commonly thought to indicate the relative velocity to earth. However, this shift is uniform based on distance. However, Hubble images indicate distant galaxies moving toward each other as well as away from each other. Such chaotic behavior would not be consistent with uniform movement away from earth.

Transparent matter can create an apparent change in wavelength of light passing through it.

report post as inappropriate


Douglas W Lipp wrote on May. 9, 2010 @ 01:19 GMT
continuation of Lipp - The Coney Island Green Theory.

Further to the Coney Island Green Theory, here is it's solution to the Horizon Problem:

NAME: The Coney Island Green Theory

Author & Date: Douglas W. Lipp 1978-2010 and Beyond!

Classification: Relativistic-based Time Inspired Expansion/Contraction Theory

REMARKS: Describes both...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate


Douglas W Lipp wrote on May. 31, 2010 @ 13:52 GMT
In context with all the other stuff that has been posted as regards Coney Island Green, and in order to further document CIG Theory, here is CIG's interpretation of the double slit experiment:

Concerning CIG Theory and the Double Slit Experiment, I was thinking:



With respect to the double slit experiment, if the photon/electron, etc., being in its collapsed state (i.e. black hole-like) prior to departure from its originating aperature, then proceeds to it becoming more spatial (MT=S in accordance with Coney Island Green), manifesting into a much much larger three dimensional spatial state, could it then not go through both slits? For instance, without the need for the current quantumn conundrum of splitting into two particles and having one particle go through both slits, like some sort of quantum magic? Current thought requires the particle to split and go through both slits, to be in two places at once, like magic. CIG theory allows some of the the particle, now in its spatial state, to go through one slit, and some of the particle to go through the remaining slit. No magic necessary. Much more believable.



The introduction of MT=S allows for the particle to go through both slits without the need for quantumn confusion. Then, the spatial field faces interference and diffraction, according to normal wave theory. It collapses accordingly when it "hits the wall", adhering to probabilities of wave function collapse (the probabilities may actually follow the 4th Law of Motion & the desire to reach time equilibrium). The collapse of the spatial field (S/T=M), reintroduces not the particle, but a new particle, only different from the first via its transmutations through its field interractions during its journey from the originating aperature, through both slits, subsequent wave interference, and final collapse.



What about quantum entaglement? What are the repercussions of CIG theory on quantum entanglement?

This post to be read in context with all other posts about Coney Island Green theory. Please follow the thought process of the other posts to discover CIG's interpretation of :

Dark Matter

Dark Energy

Red Shift Anomalies

Expanding Universe

Horizon Problem

Quantification of Matter to Space

& now, CIG's interpretation of the Double Slit Experiment

Up Next: quantum entanglement

CIG theory is a relativistic theory offering new possibilities , and, where Einstein stopped with matter warping the spacetime continuum, CIG theory takes the next logical step to state that it is the spacetime continuum itself that actually turns into matter.

Please read other nearby posts concerning CIG Theory.

report post as inappropriate


Douglas W Lipp wrote on Jun. 6, 2010 @ 00:00 GMT
The Coney Island Green Theory - continuation of the thought process...

To be inserted into Coney Island Green Theory's discussion on CIG's reference to "Time Equilibrium" as the motivating force of all motion. Herein, some thoughts only on my understanding of "Charge" as it may relate to the topic. Further thought is undoubtedly necessary.

For the tie-in, read CIG's Fourth Law of Motion.

Somewhere in CIG I briefly stated that all motion was a desire to reach "Time Equilibrium". And by "Time", I mean rate, velocity with a vector, "c", percentages of "c", movement and motion.

If charge is "spin" brought about by an accelerating (movement again) particle, I gather a plus charge spins one way while a negative charge spins the oposite way.

Then, since everything is trying to reach "Time Equilibrium" (in accordance with CIG), unlike spin [movements in opposite directions (opposite times)] would attact to create the "Time Equilibrium".

Since "spins" in the same direction present a situation whereby "Time" would be additive in nature, creating a further dis-equilibrium, they repel each other.

Motion is a desire for particles to reach Time Equilibrium (re-read CIG's fourth law of motion).

I believe that the above is the true reason that like particles repel and unlike particles attract.

Does any of this make sense? This is the start of some random thinking along the lines of expanding the brief CIG comment regarding "Time Equilibrium". Motion Equilibrium.

Please read and fully understand all the implications of CIG Theory. Since I am not a physicist, it is apparent that if correct, the theory offers a lot more to the community than I can provide.

Please see the above posts by Douglas Lipp as regards solutions to natural and cosmological problems.

At such time as time allows, all CIG posts will be consolidated and incorporated in CIG Theory.

Thank you for making the effort to understand CIG Theory.

Douglas W Lipp

report post as inappropriate


Douglas W Lipp wrote on Jun. 6, 2010 @ 13:47 GMT
CIG Theory - a continuation

To clarify the above post wherein it is stated:

"If charge is "spin" brought about by an accelerating (movement again) particle, I gather a plus charge spins one way while a negative charge spins the oposite way."

Clarified -

It is the accelerating charged particle that results in "radiation".

Spin alone does not necessarily have to be accelerating. It can be non-accelerating velocity, however, it will have a vector associated with it, dependent upon the direction of spin.

When the charged "spinning" particle accelerates, it interrupts various other fields with their own spin characteristics. Along the way, our particle with its inspired "time-motion-"c"- percentages thereof-with vector arrow-rates along with its possessed angular velocity", inherent to our particle, attempts to reach "time equilibrium" with the many other "times" inherent to the other particles our original particle encounters. These fields are many and varied. The desire to reach this equilibrium results in "radiation" - radiating spatial quantities in accordance with the CIG quantification of mass to space.

The different densities of spatial manifestation result in the different types of matter (i.e. Dark Matter, Dark Energy).

All the different "decays" of the Standard Model also entail new Spatial effects as well.

Please read The Coney Island Green (CIG) Theory today

Among other things, CIG theory explains where space itself comes from.

Thank You

Douglas W Lipp

report post as inappropriate


Douglas W Lipp wrote on Aug. 19, 2010 @ 11:56 GMT
Douglas W Lipp

THE CONEY ISLAND GREEN THEORY (continued)

Further To CIG Theory - You must read all posts below to understand this posting

From the Wiki site "Cosmological Constant" the following was excerpted:

"One possible explanation for the small but non-zero value was noted by Steven Weinberg in 1987 following the anthropic principle.[8] Weinberg explains that if the vacuum energy took different values in different domains of the universe, then observers would necessarily measure values similar to that which is observed: the formation of life-supporting structures would be suppressed in domains where the vacuum energy is much larger. "

Specifically, regarding, "Weinberg explains that if the vacuum energy took different values in different domains of the universe", the attached Coney Island Green Theory does exactly that.

I am stating in CIG (inherently implied) the theory's ability to explain exactly how vacuum energy takes on different values in different domains of the universe. Based on varying rates of massive particles. The same explanation I am providing for Dark Matter and Dark Energy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_catastrophe

http:/
/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmological_constant_problem#Cosmolo
gical_constant_problem

Without little understanding of the topic, I am now going on record that CIG Theory solves both the Vacuum Energy Catastrophe as well as the Cosmological Constant Problem! As of this moment, CIG Theory claims to offer these solutions.

CIG Theory now offers an explaination for:

Vacuum Energy Catastrophe

Cosmological Constant Problem

Dark Matter

Dark Energy

Red Shift Anomalies

Red Shift

Accelerating Universe

Expanding Universe

A physical representation of E=mc²

The manifestation of mass to space (at the spatial density of H or He whatever it was)

AND MORE!



For a hard copy of CIG Theory please email me at lippfamily@earthlink.net

Respectfully,

Douglas W Lipp

report post as inappropriate


Dov Henis wrote on Aug. 25, 2010 @ 06:40 GMT
Natural Selection Derives From Cosmic Expansion

Two suggested editorial items:

I.

Origin And Nature Of Natural Selection

Update Concepts And Comprehension

Life is another mass format.

All mass formats are subject to natural selection.

Natural selection is delaying conversion of mass to energy fueling cosmic expansion.

Cosmic expansion is...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate


Douglas W Lipp wrote on Sep. 14, 2010 @ 12:08 GMT
To be pieced together with CIG Theory :

The dissapearance of length along the x-axis only is consistent with the fact that at the rate "c", only the forefront of the matter in motion observes that motion, while that matter behind it moves relative to the particles intimately close by - i. e. relative to their nearby matter friends, they are not in motion. Only the x-axis sees the rate "c". The matter chunks directly behind the forefront x-axis wait their turn to see that rate (unitil then , they see no motion). So, height and breadth only dissappear (contract) when they become exclusively x-axis matter. As length contracts - something must happen. Mass does not get heavier, rather, it transforms into space. And this is the space that Hubble saw through the red shift. Can someone find someone who can correlate the known percentages of Dark Matter & Dark Energy as predicted by my theory? If CIG is correct, the percentages will correlate with transformation along the x-axia, according to Lorentz transformations.

Photons have rest mass. Only at "c" do they shed all their mass. The space has to come from somewhere!

Don't worry about unit agreement. Units only touch upon the many faults in the theory. At the same time, a concern over units also misses the many natural observations the theory attempts to explain. Further, some unexplained natural features of the Universe are actually predicted by the theory.

There is no reason why the Standard Model should stop abruptly at sizes smaller than us. It must be extended upward and outward.

My next post will calrify units, as some people are worried about the units.

SEE PREVIOUS CONEY ISLAND GREEN THEORY POSTS

report post as inappropriate


Douglas W Lipp wrote on Oct. 3, 2010 @ 01:29 GMT
Coney Island Green - continued - see all posts

Get This - "Another Link"

From the Wiki - Cosmological Constant site:



The cosmological constant Λ appears in Einstein's modified field equation in the form of

ADD Field Equation Here as it would not "cut and paste" see Wiki

where R and g pertain to the structure of spacetime, T pertains to matter and energy (thought of as affecting that structure), and G and c are conversion factors that arise from using traditional units of measurement. When Λ is zero, this reduces to the original field equation of general relativity. When T is zero, the field equation describes empty space (the vacuum).

The cosmological constant has the same effect as an intrinsic energy density of the vacuum, ρvac (and an associated pressure). In this context it is commonly defined with a proportionality factor of 8π: Λ = 8πρvac, where unit conventions of general relativity are used (otherwise factors of G and c would also appear). It is common to quote values of energy density directly, though still using the name "cosmological constant".

A positive vacuum energy density resulting from a cosmological constant implies a negative pressure, and vice versa. If the energy density is positive, the associated negative pressure will drive an accelerated expansion of empty space. (See dark energy and cosmic inflation for details.)

END Wiki

Enter CIG



OK - Specifically, where it is stated above, "When T is zero, the field equation describes empty space (the vacuum). & remember, " T pertains to matter and energy (thought of as affecting that structure)"

this correlates with CIG as follows:

In CIG, when matter [their T (not mine which states T=Time)] is no longer there, it has transformed into space [MT=S]. It is an interpretation that within the Einstein equation, and where T pertains to matter and energy (thought of as affecting that structure, and where it is also stated that When T is zero, the field equation describes empty space (the vacuum), this all correlates to CIG, whereby it is an active process through which matter manifests itself into the vaccuum. It is stated many times within CIG that this is due to varying rates (% of"c"). Spacetime must be broken.

SEE CONEY ISLAND GREEN THEORY TODAY

Send No money now!

Douglas W Lipp

The Wiki - Cosmological Constant site stuff did not cut & paste well - please go directly to the site and correlate with my additional comments:

report post as inappropriate


Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:
Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.