• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

Dimensions, Universe, and Time

And we are made of this sort of magnetic gravity.

We know our heart emits a huge torus of electro-magnetic energy by pumping ions through our circulatory system.

In this research, scientists switched on physiological systems without biochemical means, they instead magnetically manipulated receptor systems, turning them on without typical pharmaceutical (biochemical) manipulations.
http://physorg.com/news119078920.html

Good I have omni-company! gotta love the omniMEME

I believe dark matter and dark energy is really the remnant of our forgetting that quarks have an electrical and magnetic moment, which changes the structure of space as gravity.

Black holes become supermassive quark stars at the center of galaxies,
interpreted by our instruments as singularities,
setting the electro-magnetic gravitational rhythm for the Milky Way.

My questions are:
How were/are these quarks generated? How do they interact with electrons?

We could eliminate the gravitational force, the weak force, and eventually the strong.

Say there's only the electro-magnetic forces of interacting electrons and quarks.

Gravity = quark-electron attractions
Weak = quark-quark repulsions
Strong = quark-quark attractions

and EM is how we know it= electron-electron attractions/repulsions

Maybe the GUT/TOE is an electromagnetic theory after all.

Boy am I glad I'm no scientist.

http://physorg.com/news119097924.html
Protons are just three quarks in a complex. They have POWER!
 
Last edited:
neverstop said:
Who else thinks we've gotten gravity wrongagain? I think dark matter/energy is a very good sign that we have.
Click to expand...
We have a partial story. In 'weak fields', where space-time isn't too curved, then relativity works. We have a lot of experimental evidence for this. At even weaker field strengths, you don't even need relativity, Newton's much simpler models will be accurate enough.

As we move into considering very strong fields or where the quantum properties of gravitons cannot be ignored, we'll find that the theories we develop for them will end up having a weak field limit which gives us precisely relativity. It has to, that's how physics works. Theory 1 explains A and B. Theory 2 explains A, B and C but when you are work in a regime where C isn't important, Theory 2 becomes Theory 1. Theory 2 is more powerful but possibly more complex. Relativity is a lot more complex than Newtonian gravity, though it's considerably more elegant, in my opinion and much much richer.

Infact, the gravity theories we have coming from things like supersymmetry and string theory gives us, in the weak field limit or large radii of curvature, the Einstein Field Equations.

Dark energy was pretty much predicted by Einstein the moment he developed (along with the help of a bunch of others) it, but experimenters told him otherwise. Dark mass isn't too hard to swallow. There are lots of particles which we cannot 'see' (ie don't interact with light). Is it so suprising some of them might be made in nature and some of them might be stable?

The converse, that we've seen all we're going to see of the universe, is a little naive.
Manifespo said:
Say there's only the electro-magnetic forces of interacting electrons and quarks.

Gravity = quark-electron attractions
Weak = quark-quark repulsions
Strong = quark-quark attractions

and EM is how we know it= electron-electron attractions/repulsions

Maybe the GUT/TOE is an electromagnetic theory after all.
Click to expand...
Except that experiments falsify all of that. The weak bosons directly interact with photons or electrons. Quarks can interact via all three quantum forces.

Of course I'd ask you for a working model but you won't be able to provide one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top