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.

Contests Home


Previous Contests

What Is “Fundamental”
October 28, 2017 to January 22, 2018
Sponsored by the Fetzer Franklin Fund and The Peter & Patricia Gruber Foundation
read/discusswinners

Wandering Towards a Goal
How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?
December 2, 2016 to March 3, 2017
Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fund.
read/discusswinners

Trick or Truth: The Mysterious Connection Between Physics and Mathematics
Contest Partners: Nanotronics Imaging, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, and The John Templeton Foundation
Media Partner: Scientific American

read/discusswinners

How Should Humanity Steer the Future?
January 9, 2014 - August 31, 2014
Contest Partners: Jaan Tallinn, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, The John Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

It From Bit or Bit From It
March 25 - June 28, 2013
Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Questioning the Foundations
Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?
May 24 - August 31, 2012
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, SubMeta, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Is Reality Digital or Analog?
November 2010 - February 2011
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?
May - October 2009
Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams
read/discusswinners

The Nature of Time
August - December 2008
read/discusswinners

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

dnamic Strong: on 9/25/18 at 7:28am UTC, wrote I would like to get across my appreciation for your kind-heartedness in...

Agen Online: on 10/22/17 at 21:06pm UTC, wrote Situs Judi Domino Agen Domino Domino Online Situs Judi Terpercaya Agen...

Steve Dufourny Jedi: on 10/31/12 at 13:10pm UTC, wrote I see that the seti institute needs funds apparently. I am happy that this...

Ben: on 10/5/12 at 3:18am UTC, wrote Thanks, Sergey Fedosin for poiting out the furmula. This contest should...

Steve Dufourny Jedi: on 10/4/12 at 17:01pm UTC, wrote Probably that the system is in crisis, the lack of funds probably no? not...

Jason Wolfe: on 10/4/12 at 9:33am UTC, wrote Ben, I need to ask if my interplanetary travel idea makes any sense. In...

Sergey Fedosin: on 10/4/12 at 3:59am UTC, wrote If you do not understand why your rating dropped down. As I found ratings...

Jason Wolfe: on 10/4/12 at 3:23am UTC, wrote Hi Ben, I share your dream of interstellar travel. I also wish we could...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

isabell ella: "If you are facing Cash app related problems and want to get support..." in Cosmic Dawn, Parallel...

Georgina Woodward: "Quite right Lorraine, ( to be clear perhaps I should have said..." in Cosmological Koans

Lorraine Ford: "Honestly Georgina, Wake up! Change of number is NOT energy." in Cosmological Koans

Joe Fisher: "Dear Dr. Kuhn, Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this..." in Can Time Be Saved From...

Michael Hussey: "https://www.google.com" in New Nuclear "Magic...

Michael Hussey: "it is really difficult to understand what is all about all the things..." in New Nuclear "Magic...

Stefan Weckbach: "I have a problem with the notion of time in the multiverse scenario that..." in First Things First: The...

Roger Granet: "By the way, this post was from Roger." in First Things First: The...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

First Things First: The Physics of Causality
Why do we remember the past and not the future? Untangling the connections between cause and effect, choice, and entropy.

Can Time Be Saved From Physics?
Philosophers, physicists and neuroscientists discuss how our sense of time’s flow might arise through our interactions with external stimuli—despite suggestions from Einstein's relativity that our perception of the passage of time is an illusion.

Thermo-Demonics
A devilish new framework of thermodynamics that focuses on how we observe information could help illuminate our understanding of probability and rewrite quantum theory.

Gravity's Residue
An unusual approach to unifying the laws of physics could solve Hawking's black-hole information paradox—and its predicted gravitational "memory effect" could be picked up by LIGO.

Could Mind Forge the Universe?
Objective reality, and the laws of physics themselves, emerge from our observations, according to a new framework that turns what we think of as fundamental on its head.


FQXi FORUM
July 18, 2019

CATEGORY: Questioning the Foundations Essay Contest (2012) [back]
TOPIC: Questioning the Foundations of Physics To Achieve Interstellar Travel by Benjamin Thomas Solomon [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Benjamin Thomas Solomon wrote on Sep. 7, 2012 @ 11:30 GMT
Essay Abstract

This essay looks at the author’s research and compares it with contemporary physics to ask more questions. What is a force? Why do we need to ‘travel’? Why can’t we just ‘arrive’? Is interstellar travel achievable? Does subspace exists? Is contemporary physics looking for answers in the wrong places?

Author Bio

Solomon recently completed a 12-year study into the theoretical and technological feasibility of gravity modification. He is the author of “An Introduction to Gravity Modification”, Universal Publishers, 520 pages, January 2012. Solomon has published several related papers, at peer reviewed SPESIF conferences and in Physics Essays.

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Steve Dufourny wrote on Sep. 7, 2012 @ 19:06 GMT
Hello Mr Solomon,

I must admit that I am fascinated by these kind of works and researchs about our extrasolar travels.All is possible in fact.Fascinating is a weak word.I dream all the nights about exoplanets and lifes and this and that.

It is my reason of being in fact all these spheres and lifes. I imagine civilizations, more evolved, less evolved, I imagine others technologies, ans so mnay combinations, biological, the anthropical principle seems dancing with the entropical distribution. It is fascinating and frustrating this universal sphere. If I could, I will take a spaceship and I will visit all the planets of our universe.

It is relevant.

I wish you good luck for this contest.

Regards

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Wood wrote on Sep. 10, 2012 @ 15:21 GMT
Dear Benjamin Solomon,

I enjoyed your essay, and found some of it thought provoking. It seems to me that the nuclear rocket engine is a realistic possible mode of future travel within our galaxy, with the great advantage that after acceleration, very high speeds can in principle be achieved. Whether the voyages will be manned or unmanned (or womanned or unwomanned) is a moot point.

Good luck in the contest,

John

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


The Spherical Jedi wrote on Sep. 10, 2012 @ 23:47 GMT
Hello dear starwalkers,

Here are some ideas for the cosmological travel and the teleportation that I have posted on the thread of Lawrence BC. I beleive that it is cool to put it here.For Mr Solomon and its team.

Hello Lawrence and Mr.Danoyan,

You know Lawrence.When I am not parano, I see the convergences with strings and the 3D.

So I am discussing,:) The light permits...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

The Spherical Jedi replied on Sep. 10, 2012 @ 23:54 GMT
ps ...the gravitation is proportional with the rotations of spheres.If the volumes are taken into account, it becomes relevant.

My Equations.

for all physical spheres. mcosV=constant.

c linear velocity

o orbital velocity

s spinal velocity

V volume of the sphere

The 3 motions of the spheres of light must be inserted. so indeed the checking of the gravitation is possible if we check the rotations.

Regards

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Frank Makinson wrote on Sep. 11, 2012 @ 18:51 GMT
From your essay, page 5, "But gravity modification is not the means for interstellar travel."

Yes it is, we simply have to understand how gravity works.

Have you been successful in presenting a paper to one of the 100yr Starship conferences?

I had submitted an abstract for a paper, for the 2011 DARPA/NASA 100Yr Starship Conference, that described how to produce artificial...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Ben replied on Sep. 15, 2012 @ 12:09 GMT
Frank Makinson, yes, I presented the paper "Non Gaussian Radiation Shielding" at the 2011 DARPA/NASA 100YSS Public Symposium, and my team was one that responded to the DARPA/NASA rpf, and we were not selected.

I am willing to start an equivalent to the current 100YSS team if I can get the funding. I am sure me & my team can do it in less than a hundred years because of the theoretical-empirical work I've completed.

I also had the paper "Gravitational acceleration without mass and noninertia fields" published in the AIP journal Physics Essays, Sept 2011. Here is the link:

http://physicsessays.org/doi/ref/10.4006/1.3595113

I must admit that their peer-review process was very difficult. It took about 1 1/2 years. But it was worth it because this peer-review process helped clarify many of my thought and I introduced an elegantly simple test for natural versus theoretical gravitational fields.

If you are still interested in getting published, you could submit it to SPSISW, Space Propulsion Sciences International Symposium/Workshop, if it fits their agenda. Their web page is:

http://ias-spes.org/SPSISW2013/

Best

Ben

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny Jedi replied on Sep. 18, 2012 @ 11:35 GMT
and who checks my pc ?f course anybody.

You want waht, the last time I have seen your seti institute and hop I have click on a page and hop my pc was finished.

It is what this strategy, if it is an other country who tries to imply confusions, so it is sad.

That will not change my decisions.

It is what the probelm, the lack of funds or what ?

I am surprised by these comportments from said responsible scientists.!!!a pure ironical strategy from a team implying confusions for their own strategy.I know these persons Mr Solomon, I know that it is not you. I know from who it is ! They are in fact now in a very bad situation. They are obliged to kill me these pseudo scientists loving money and forgetting the essential. Ironical no? they have played, so I will finish. all my lifes, I will fight and also after my death.

Regards

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny Jedi replied on Oct. 4, 2012 @ 17:01 GMT
Probably that the system is in crisis, the lack of funds probably no?

not selected ?

:) me I have so many inventions. even for the weapons but I dislike that ! ahahahah

ROTATIONS OF SPHERES..........ENERGY !!!



New turbins :) .....gravitational acceleration EQUILIBRIUM ......revolutionary !!!

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Member Benjamin F. Dribus wrote on Sep. 15, 2012 @ 06:25 GMT
Dear Benjamin,

You have some interesting thoughts. Regarding the idea of "just arriving," I have often thought that the concept of "locality" in physics ought to be redefined. Rather than worrying about "nonlocal" interactions, we ought to consider A to be local to B if A directly influences B. This means giving up the assumption that spacetime is a manifold, but it allows for the possibility of a "short path" between two locations even if other paths are "long." Take care,

Ben

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Sergey G Fedosin wrote on Sep. 18, 2012 @ 07:20 GMT
Dear Benjamin,

In your essay I find: < Prof. Eric Laithwaites Big Wheel experiment would be such a problem. Until now no one has solved it. > But there is the explanation of the experiment at the site http://www2.eng.cam.ac.uk/~hemh/gyroscopes/laithwaite.html .

Sergey Fedosin

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Ben replied on Sep. 18, 2012 @ 09:17 GMT
Thanks, Sergei Fedosin.

Regarding the link. Quite obviously 'solved' by someone who has no idea how to empirically test a concept.

Before rushing into exotic mathematics there a very simple question he could have asked himself.

How does the human writs hold a 50 lb (approx 23 kg) weight at the end of a 3 ft ( or 1 m) rod, with one hand.

Also, note that the late Prof. Morris Kline in his book "Mathematics: The Loss of Certainty" said that mathematics has become so very sophisticated that it is now used to prove anything.

And therefore, this tremendous success of mathematics has led to the loss of certainty of whether what mathematics has proved is real or not.

Coming back to the link you provided. With all that sophisticated mathematics the author has not answered the question, how does the human wrist carry a 50 lb weight at the end of a 3 ft rod?

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Ben replied on Sep. 18, 2012 @ 09:22 GMT
My apologies for the spelling mistakes. Should read . . .

Thanks, Sergei Fedosin.

Regarding the link. Quite obviously 'solved' by someone who has no idea how to empirically test a concept.

Before rushing into exotic mathematics there a very simple question he could have asked himself.

How does the human wrist hold a 50 lb (approx 23 kg) weight at the end of a 3 ft (or 1 m) rod, with one hand?

Also, note that the late Prof. Morris Kline in his book "Mathematics: The Loss of Certainty" said that mathematics has become so very sophisticated that it is now used to prove anything.

And therefore, this tremendous success of mathematics has led to the loss of certainty of whether what mathematics has proved is real or not.

Coming back to the link you provided. With all that sophisticated mathematics the author has not answered the simple question, how does the human wrist carry a 50 lb weight at the end of a 3 ft rod?

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Helmut Hansen wrote on Sep. 18, 2012 @ 12:59 GMT
Dear Ben,

I am convinced, too, that interstellar travel could be a real possibility.

I discovered a sort of STARGATE - a specific bifurcation point of velocity, where the relativistic function is splitted into two branches. One branch is our usual relativistic space-time-continuum, limited by the speed of light, the other one is a superluminal section embracing all velocities only limited by the velocity of infinity. This section I am calling GOEDELS TRENCH.

The bifurcation point can be reached - at least in principle: It is given at the velocity of .707 c (or exactly: 1/SQR 2 c). But I have no idea, whether it is possible or not to switch from the relativistic part of spacetime into Goedels Trench.

If you google: Do Space and Time have an Archetypal Design? some points of this vision are explained in greater detail.

Good Luck for Essay as well as for your WORK.

Kind Regards

Helmut

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Ben replied on Sep. 20, 2012 @ 08:59 GMT
Thanks Helmut Hansen.

First, I would suggest developing your ideas more until you have a better mathematical framework to publish in a journal. Look at it this way. How would you explain to an engineer how to implement these formulae so that (s)he can build a test or an engine?

Yes, I am sometimes critical of how people jump into the mathematics and consider mathematics an end in itself. But if you have asked the basic questions and stay closer to empirical data, then mathematics is indispensable, and science progresses.

Second, if you are using numerical modeling, an Intel machine (eg Excel) calculates correctly to 15 significant digits, and so be careful as the Lorentz-Fitzgerald transformation does not evaluate correctly when v is close to c.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Helmut Hansen replied on Sep. 20, 2012 @ 09:22 GMT
Dear Ben,

I understand your suggestion and it is certainly right. But sometimes such a suggestion is too restrictive. Think of the most famous equation of E = mc^2. It has its value in itself - without any reference to an engine.

Sometimes visions are needed. And if we want to travel to the stars within reasonable times even a great vision is needed.

Kind Regards

Helmut

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Ben replied on Sep. 20, 2012 @ 12:52 GMT
True,Helmut Hansen. And I totally agree with your statement about vision.

However, if I remember the history of physic correctly, E = mc^2 was not derived from theory. It was known before Eisnstein's time from experimental data as dE = dmc^2, where dE is the change in energy and dm is the change in mass.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Hoang cao Hai wrote on Sep. 19, 2012 @ 09:53 GMT
Dear

Very interesting to see your essay.

Perhaps all of us are convinced that: the choice of yourself is right!That of course is right.

So let's the consider clearly defined for the basis foundations theoretical as the most challenging with intellectual of all of us.

A real challenge is very close and are the focus of interest of the human science: it is a matter of mass and grain Higg boson of the standard model.

Knowledge and belief reasoning of you how to express an opinion on this matter:

You have think that: the Mass is the expression of the impact force to material - so no impact force, we do not feel the Higg boson - similar to the case of no weight outside the Earth's atmosphere.

Does there need to be a particle with mass for everything have volume? If so, then why the mass of everything change when moving from the Earth to the Moon? Higg boson is lighter by the Moon's gravity is weaker than of Earth?

LHC particle accelerator used to "Smashed" until "Ejected" Higg boson, but why only when the "Smashed" can see it,and when off then not see it ?

Can be "locked" Higg particles? so when "released" if we do not force to it by any the Force, how to know that it is "out" or not?

You are should be boldly to give a definition of weight that you think is right for us to enjoy, or oppose my opinion.

Because in the process of research, the value of "failure" or "success" is the similar with science. The purpose of a correct theory be must is without any a wrong point ?

Glad to see from you comments soon!

Hải.Caohoàng of THE INCORRECT ASSUMPTIONS AND A CORRECT THEORY

August 23, 2012 - 11:51 GMT on this essay contest.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Ben replied on Sep. 20, 2012 @ 08:41 GMT
Thanks, Hoang Cao Hai.

I wasn't sure what your questions were. I think you had several question:

1. What is your opinion about mass?

2. How does mass work since it is lighter on the Moon than on Earth?

3. How did CERN detect the Higgs-type boson since you cannot detect it without smashing particles?

First, to do what I have done I have had to restrict my focus...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Hoang cao Hai replied on Sep. 28, 2012 @ 05:02 GMT
Dear Ben

Many thanks for your attention.

I think: to develop new propulsion to travel in space, the first thing we need to understand is the true nature of that space and the true principles of thrust, then find suitable for energy and technological practical orientation.

If we do not understand in order to identify the source and direction of force in space, we will be harder to "go against the wind."

Perhaps it is that we do not like?

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Sergey G Fedosin wrote on Sep. 26, 2012 @ 05:01 GMT
Dear Benjamin,

I think that rotation of rotating wheel (gyroscope) in horizontal plane with the help of rod gives precession of the rod which is in vertical direction diminish weight. So the work of rotation is used to counteract to force of gravity. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gyroscope.

Sergey Fedosin

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Ben wrote on Sep. 27, 2012 @ 13:29 GMT
Thanks, Sergey Fedosin for pointing out this formula.

If you put numbers into this formula and then compare the results with what Laithwaite was doing with the Big Wheel experiment, gyroscopic precession is off by 2 orders of magnitude.

It all in my book "An Introduction to Gravity Modification, Second Edition". Publisher's link is

http://www.universal-publishers.com/book.php?method=ISBN&boo
k=1612330894

Best

Ben

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Sergey G Fedosin wrote on Oct. 2, 2012 @ 06:21 GMT
After studying about 250 essays in this contest, I realize now, how can I assess the level of each submitted work. Accordingly, I rated some essays, including yours.

Cood luck.

Sergey Fedosin

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Ben replied on Oct. 2, 2012 @ 08:52 GMT
Sergey Fedosin, thanks for rating this essay, and more importantly asking question. From the average score your rating was probably a low one for this essay.

I'm not surprised. Most people's idea of change is a perturbation of their world view or knowledge. Anything significantly different than that causes an knee jerk reaction of dislike.

There is real world confirmation of this. Just look at the history of string theories. String theories took decades (30-years?) to become mainstream, primarily because the then establishment did not want anything really new or at least different to deal with.

I'm not waiting on the physics community to accept my work I'm going ahead to develop technologies that I have researched. I'm confident because my research is based on experiment/empirical data. And that is the fastest way to change technology.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Georgina Woodward wrote on Oct. 2, 2012 @ 23:29 GMT
Dear Benjamin Solomon,

I wanted to let you know I have taken a look at your essay. I have noticed you have not yet had a message from Jason Wolf who has been a long time member of the FQXi blogs community, frequently talking about his ideas for interstellar propulsion or space modification to facilitate it. I regret that I am unable to fruitfully discuss many of his ideas as they do not fit well with my own way of thinking about how the universe functions. However I can see that you two might have much in common in your desire to accomplish interstellar travel, despite the theoretical limitations of current theory. I will recommend he takes a look at your essay. In my essay I set out what basic physical assumptions are wrong and give an explanatory framework for physics that allows many of the current problems of physics to be overcome. High res. diagram in discussion thread. Perhaps that theoretical solution might also be useful to you in your in consideration of the important practical issues for developing interstellar travel. Kind regards Georgina.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Ben replied on Oct. 3, 2012 @ 02:08 GMT
Thanks Georgina Parry.

I searched and found this essay

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1350?search=1

We are so very different. For starters, the wavefunction is not the particle. The wavefunction is the effect of the particle on spacetime.

Second, I used very extensive numerical modeling* to arrive at many of my results, the crux of which the Non Inertia (Ni) Field is defined as the spatial gradient of time dilation. I don't even think aether.

But thanks.

Ben

* g=(tau)c^2 took about 4 months of daily 8-10 hrs of number crunching, by the computer, not me manually doing it, to discover.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Ben replied on Oct. 3, 2012 @ 02:42 GMT
I must also add that Robert Nemiroff & his colleagues have observed a 3 photon occurance from a gamma-ray burst that suggests that quantum foam may not exists and therefore invalidate some or all of quantum gravity. Here is the article,

http://www.space.com/17399-gamma-ray-photons-quantum
-spacetime.html

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Anonymous replied on Oct. 4, 2012 @ 01:30 GMT
Hi Ben,

Wave-functions are of course probability amplitudes; they are used to describe quantum systems. In the essay contest before this one, I asserted that space-time was ontologically made of wave-functions. Readers had trouble understanding how space-time could be made of math. So in this essay, I rephrased it this way. If wave-functions had an ontological physically existing counterpart, the space-time continuum would be composed of it.

I gotta run.

Jason Wolfe

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Sergey G Fedosin wrote on Oct. 4, 2012 @ 03:59 GMT
If you do not understand why your rating dropped down. As I found ratings in the contest are calculated in the next way. Suppose your rating is
and
was the quantity of people which gave you ratings. Then you have
of points. After it anyone give you
of points so you have
of points and
is the common quantity of the people which gave you ratings. At the same time you will have
of points. From here, if you want to be R2 > R1 there must be:
or
or
In other words if you want to increase rating of anyone you must give him more points
then the participant`s rating
was at the moment you rated him. From here it is seen that in the contest are special rules for ratings. And from here there are misunderstanding of some participants what is happened with their ratings. Moreover since community ratings are hided some participants do not sure how increase ratings of others and gives them maximum 10 points. But in the case the scale from 1 to 10 of points do not work, and some essays are overestimated and some essays are drop down. In my opinion it is a bad problem with this Contest rating process.

Sergey Fedosin

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Ben replied on Oct. 5, 2012 @ 03:18 GMT
Thanks, Sergey Fedosin for poiting out the furmula.

This contest should not be about popularity. The creators of string theory were reviled when it first came out about 30 yrs ago, but today it is mainstream.

This contest should be about challenges, and the closer the challenges are to our comfort zone, the less valuale the challenge. The further the stated challenges are from our comfort zone, then the stronger and more valuable the challenges are.



Best,

Ben

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny Jedi wrote on Oct. 31, 2012 @ 13:10 GMT
I see that the seti institute needs funds apparently. I am happy that this institute likes my works about the spherization'sTheory of the Universal 3D sphere by quantum 3D spheres and cosmological 3D spheres.

Interesting comportment. Let's work together, we are going to invent a spaceship ok Mr Solomon.And we shall be in the oprah winfrey show, it is cool no?

The Universe is a sphere !!! we are travallers from stars, babies of the Universal sphere.

It is fascinating.

ps I have always dreamt to work in astrobiology. It is fascinating and the word is weak.They are so numerous the lifes inside our Universal sphere in spherization. I ask me what are their forms, their technologies, their adaptations, their encodings of evolution, ...My equations help a lot for the encodings.

Be the force with you !

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Agen Domino Online wrote on Oct. 22, 2017 @ 21:06 GMT
Situs Judi Domino

Agen Domino

Domino Online

Situs Judi Terpercaya

Agen BandarQ

PKV GAMES

Situs QQ 2018

HP QQ

Domino Online 2018

Agen Poker 2018

BandarQ 2018

Bandar Sakong 2018

Agen Poker Terbaik

BandarQ Terbaik

Bandar Sakong terbaik

Capsa Susun Terbaik

Agen Domino Terbaik

Info Situs Judi Terpercaya

I did not expect this site to have such good information

I really like this kind of information

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


dnamic Strong wrote on Sep. 25, 2018 @ 07:28 GMT
I would like to get across my appreciation for your kind-heartedness in support of individuals that actually need guidance on that subject. Your very own dedication to getting the message all-around appeared to be extremely significant and has frequently permitted men and women much like me to reach their dreams. Your amazing insightful recommendations indicates a lot to me and additionally to my mates. With thanks; from each one of us.

Berita Bola

Berita Bola Terkini

Prediksi Skor Bola

Bookmark and Share
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.