Understanding the universe.

[apelike]

Well, having had the best nights sleep in ages (courtesy of reading some of the posts on this thread), I was ready once again to attempt to understand what it all means...

 

Now although my mathematical prowess is at a level whereby I'm able to offer the checkout person at Sainsburys the correct change even before a single item has been scanned (achieved partly through hours of trolley pushing and partly being a born Yorkshireman), I'm the first to admit that I'm a bit out of my depth here...

 

... but I do have, what I consider to be a valid question.

 

That is, I'm told, that when you calculate the square root of a positive number you always get two answers... a positive one and an equivalent negative one.

 

Now... if this is correct and it's possible for a question to have two correct answers, just think of the real world implications!

 

Our legal system would fall apart... there would be no one truth!

 

And if that's not bad enough... I'm told the square root of a negative number is... wait for it... an imaginary number!

 

You couldn't make it up!

 

Try reading about Schroedingers cat then, it can be dead or alive at the same time!!

[petemcewan]

Mr Bloke,

 

I'm glad you had a restful night. As far as I'm aware, none of us on this thread are astrophysicists .It's just a discussion topic-with a bit of maths thrown in.

I'm curious that no one has taken up the "multiverse". That's a grand topic for flights of fancy.

 

 

Schrodinger's pussy cat ? It is a thought experiment. No actual pussy cat was : injured , mistreated, killed and brought back to life again, split in half, kept in a box for too long,poked with sticks,made to be in two places at once, or subjected to any kind of cruelty whatsoever.

(Got to have a laugh ).

Edited March 26, 2016 by petemcewan

[andyofborg]

:

That is, I'm told, that when you calculate the square root of a positive number you always get two answers... a positive one and an equivalent negative one.

 

And if that's not bad enough... I'm told the square root of a negative number is... wait for it... an imaginary number!

 

 

The square root of a number is a value that, when multiplied by itself, gives the number.

 

if you take a positive number and multiply it by itself then you get a positive number. if you do the same to a negative number then you get a positive number.

 

if you multiply a positive number by a negative number then you get a negative number.

 

there isn't a number which when multiplied by itself generates a negative number and for everyday maths its kinda ok to say it can't be done but extending number theory to deal with the square roots of negative numbers allows you to do all sorts of funky things which are as exciting as porn but generally not as messy at the end.

 

---------- Post added 26-03-2016 at 22:42 ----------

 

Did you watch the new Big Bang theory though? Amy and Shelton finally had coitus!

 

indeed, but did they use protection or will there be the pitter patter of tiny feet to look forwards too.....

 

---------- Post added 26-03-2016 at 22:49 ----------

 

The nucleus of an atom is formed of protons. They should reply very strongly but don't fly apart? Why?

 

 

the nucleus also contains neutrons as well which have no charge

[Obelix]

Mr Bloke,

 

I'm glad you had a restful night. As far as I'm aware, none of us on this thread are astrophysicists

 

Ah.....

 

I'd probably qualify if I'd kept it up

[SJCrothers]

 

When a paper starts out by stating:

 

"There has been a deliberate suppression of scientific truth by the community of physicists and astronomers concerning the black hole and the big bang" I tend not to read much further.

 

I suppose he may soon update that to also include that there is no such thing as gravitational waves as Einstein's maths is wrong.

_______________________________

 

I note the interest of your discussion group. For your information I already have a paper to be published soon explaining that Einstein's gravitational waves do not exist. The LIGO-Virgo Collaborations detected neither black holes nor gravitational waves. You can see my preprint on the vixra electronic archive for free. Just visit the vixra site and search for Stephen J. Crothers.

 

It is also true that academia is not honest, just as I reported on my personal website. You will find on vixra another recent paper of mine which exposes the academic editors of the Electronic Journal of Theoretical Physics for publishing a paper in 2011 that is essentially a copy of a paper written 100 years ago by Karl Schwarzschild. The editors and the Author of the paper they published passed off the Author's copy of Schwarzschild as an original work by their Author and sometime guest editor. This is another example of academic dishonesty.

[RickyM]

I truly hope the government have vetoed any money going to waste on this. We need the money for more important things in life, like protecting welfare payments for those that need it and paying devoted immigration staff for their efforts in stopping us being invaded.

 

Say no to public money being used on 'Understanding the universe' - a scam.

[JFKvsNixon]

I truly hope the government have vetoed any money going to waste on this. We need the money for more important things in life, like protecting welfare payments for those that need it and paying devoted immigration staff for their efforts in stopping us being invaded.

 

Say no to public money being used on 'Understanding the universe' - a scam.

 

How is it a scam? The money spent by the government produces results.

[petemcewan]

I truly hope the government have vetoed any money going to waste on this. We need the money for more important things in life, like protecting welfare payments for those that need it and paying devoted immigration staff for their efforts in stopping us being invaded.

 

Say no to public money being used on 'Understanding the universe' - a scam.

 

Ricky,

 

I share your concerns viz-a-viz about the consequences of austerity .

 

But I do think that SJC will not be asking the government for any money.

 

"Understanding The Universe " is the name of this tread ,and no the name of a project being undertaken by SJC.

 

 

S.J. Crothers.

 

It's a bit of a surprise to find you following a thread on the Sheffield Forum.

 

As a precaution-in these days of identity theft- I'd like you to authenticate yourself.

 

Please write something very brief on Ric= 0. If you do write, I think I'll be able to se that it is S. J. C and not Billy Blogs from down the Sheath public house.

 

 

 

The following is not about academic honesty or dishonesty. It's about how science is conducted and how hypotheses come and go.

 

There are always competing paradigms in science that’s what makes it intereting.Karl Popper came up with an interesting notion called the Black Swan Principle.It went something like this . It doesn’t matter how many white swans you count to support your hypothesis ,that all swans are white. It only takes one black one to come along and you have to rethink your hypothesis.

Consequently , it is possible in science to build a whole edifice of evidence

supporting a theory-but at some time in the future ,a significant number of contradictions pop up and it all has to be rethought. The orthodoxy will fight to the bitter end to maintain it’s position. As Thomas Kuhn points out in his work, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, competing paradigms can run

besides each other for quite awhile-eventually the old paradigm is replaced.

I'd like to be directed to where I can find your latest paper.

Edited March 27, 2016 by petemcewan

[unbeliever]

I truly hope the government have vetoed any money going to waste on this. We need the money for more important things in life, like protecting welfare payments for those that need it and paying devoted immigration staff for their efforts in stopping us being invaded.

 

Say no to public money being used on 'Understanding the universe' - a scam.

 

You clearly have no clue as to the science behind the computer you wrote this message on, or the means by which it came about. Otherwise you would not say anything so preposterous.

As for more recent advancements. I'll let the NHS know you'll not be wanting a CT scan or MRI if you develop a serious illness.

I could go on, but I think you get the idea.

[petemcewan]

You clearly have no clue as to the science behind the computer you wrote this message on, or the means by which it came about. Otherwise you would not say anything so preposterous.

As for more recent advancements. I'll let the NHS know you'll not be wanting a CT scan or MRI if you develop a serious illness.

I could go on, but I think you get the idea.

 

You could have just said,"Don't be preposterous" , and left it at that.