A (near) Complete model of the Universe

Beyond the boundaries of established science an avalanche of exotic ideas compete for our attention. Experts tell us that these ideas should not be permitted to take up the time of working scientists, and for the most part they are surely correct. But what about the gems in the rubble pile? By what ground-rules might we bring extraordinary new possibilities to light? If you have a personal favorite theory, that is in someway related to the Electric Universe, this is where it can be posted.
Lloyd
Posts: 5413
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 9:54 pm

Re: A (near) Complete model of the Universe

Unread post by Lloyd » Wed Jun 08, 2022 1:46 am

MILES VS EU

Pete, have you read Miles' papers about the Electric Universe? Here are the titles and links.

Is the Electric Universe Controlled Opposition? As it turns out, yes.
http://milesmathis.com/thunder.pdf

Beyond Velikovsky. More unravelling of the Velikovsky project.
http://milesmathis.com/vel2.pdf

He seems to think that the EU team is conspiring against him. I don't think the team is conspiring, but the main members seem pretty biased against alternative models, such as his and Charles Chandler's and others'. Miles contributes to a forum called https://cuttingthroughthefog.com/ . I was contributing there as well until Josh, the owner, banned me, after he and Jared accused me of being a spook or conspirator, like the EU team. And Miles was probably aware of them banning me and apparently didn't object. I wasn't a yes-man like the other members seemed to be. They mostly had praises for Miles, while others who had independent views also got banned. So those folks seem very biased too, and paranoid to boot. Miles is very good at reasoning and math, I'd say, but he's apparently quick to judge people and misjudges often. I'd like to discuss his model if I have time. I think it needs more analysis regarding stacked spins especially.

STACKED SPINS
I have an alternative to stacking that I think is better in some ways, but I haven't been able to explain neutrons with it so far. Are you interested in discussing that? To get started, here's a gif that shows 3 toruses https://www.horntorus.com/illustration/ ... turns.html . The blue one is the one that I think is a pretty good representation of a photon x-spin. You have to imagine that there's a sphere (photon) within the torus revolving around the center axis. That would be Miles' model. You can see that a second complete sphere would also fit within that same torus. That would be my model. Miles' model would be off balance, mine would not. Imagine a fan blade within the torus instead of a sphere. One blade would be off balance, but two would be balanced. Both models would produce a sine wave, although Miles' model would not be able to maintain the sine wave motion due to the mass being off-balance, just like you can't throw a round ball in a sine-wave motion, except for a slight wave as with a curve ball, but that's only in a medium of air, where air pressure affects the motion. Your site has this gif link: https://vimeo.com/188447627 . I don't see a sine-wave motion there. I think Miles' Superposition paper had another gif that's more like a sine-wave. I see you have it before the other one with this link: https://i0.wp.com/thehonestscientist.co ... .gif?ssl=1 . I think Miles was looking for photon motions that would produce the EM sine-wave, so I don't think he succeeded as yet. Do you?

PARTICLES
I guess I'll discuss a little more. Miles' particles, i.e. electrons, protons, neutrons, etc, are supposed to have holes at the poles and at the equators, where photons enter at the poles and exit at the equator or at the opposite pole. Photons exit protons & electrons at their equators and exit neutrons at their opposite poles, I think. Do you see polar or equatorial openings in the above gif at https://vimeo.com/188447627 ? The motions in that gif are supposed to be the path of a single photon going through several stacked spins. How would a single photon be able to go fast enough to cause other photons to enter the polar area and exit the opposite pole or the equator? That single photon would have to go way faster than light speed to divert a continuous dense stream of incoming photons. In my model all that space within the sphere would be mostly full of photons. One photon would attract another to form a pair. The pair would attract another pair to form a fourfold. A fourfold would attract another fourfold to form an eightfold, etc. Centrifugal force might cause a polar opening in the ball of photons, but photons would be mainly attracted to the outer surface of the ball at the poles and roll around the outside to the equator due to the ball's spin. If the spin is too fast, the photons on the equator will fly away, like a disk, similar to Miles' model. Offhand, I don't see how to get neutrons. Small photon balls would be electrons. Larger balls would be protons. Maybe photons could be forced through the polar opening like Miles' neutron, but what would prevent some or most photons from going around the outside to the equator as with protons?

Lloyd
Posts: 5413
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 9:54 pm

Re: A (near) Complete model of the Universe

Unread post by Lloyd » Wed Jun 08, 2022 3:58 pm

B-PHOTON DENSITY
I see I repeated myself a little in my last post.
Pete, on your site under The B-photon, or Charge, at https://thehonestscientist.com/miles-mathis/ you said:
"Space is full of them [bombarding photons] (averaging around 56 million per cubic meter), and Miles refers to the sum total of them as the 'charge field'.
"– if we scaled up the B-photon to the size of a human there would only be around 100 of them in the entire galaxy [4]."

That seems like an impossibly low figure.
Is that 56 million per m^3 per second, or millisecond, microsecond, or nanosecond?
Or is it supposed to be 56 million per cc, or mm^3, etc?
The ISM (space) contains .1 to 1,000,000 ions, atoms, or molecules per cc (cubic cm).
56,000,000 photons per cubic meter would be only 56 photons per cc.
Aren't the B-photons supposed to make up 95% of the mass of the ISM?
The air around us is said to contain 10^19 molecules per cc.
That's 10,000,000,000,000,000,000 molecules per cc or 10 billion billion molecules per cc.
Where did you get your number?

User avatar
purplepete
Posts: 21
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2021 1:43 pm
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: A (near) Complete model of the Universe

Unread post by purplepete » Wed Jun 08, 2022 10:51 pm

Lloyd wrote: Tue Jun 07, 2022 9:22 pm Pete, I'm starting to check out your website. Why don't you put a link on your site to this forum thread? Maybe on the home page.
Good idea, thanks for that, Lloyd. Now added to the About/Home page.
Lloyd wrote: Tue Jun 07, 2022 9:22 pm I've been with this forum since shortly after it first started in 2007. I was actually following the Thoth online newsletter before that, which is where I was notified that this forum would be starting.

I've probably written more on this forum than anyone else. I also did some interviews and organized a few discussions. I also worked with NaturalPhilosophy.org a few years ago, trying to improve scientific method with them. Tried to do that on this forum a little too. I've also been posting sci news links each week for the past few years on this thread: https://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/forum3/ph ... 6965#p6965

So maybe you and I and some others can collaborate to advance helpful scientific knowledge. I've been exploring the idea of making an improved version of Wikipedia too, based on honest science.
And people have been saying I'm taking on a bit coming up with a model of the Universe - I think coming up with an improved Wikipedia with a more open discussion of Science is a much harder undertaking! ;-)

User avatar
purplepete
Posts: 21
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2021 1:43 pm
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: A (near) Complete model of the Universe

Unread post by purplepete » Wed Jun 08, 2022 10:59 pm

Lloyd wrote: Wed Jun 08, 2022 3:58 pm B-PHOTON DENSITY
I see I repeated myself a little in my last post.
Pete, on your site under The B-photon, or Charge, at https://thehonestscientist.com/miles-mathis/ you said:
"Space is full of them [bombarding photons] (averaging around 56 million per cubic meter), and Miles refers to the sum total of them as the 'charge field'.
"– if we scaled up the B-photon to the size of a human there would only be around 100 of them in the entire galaxy [4]."

That seems like an impossibly low figure.
Is that 56 million per m^3 per second, or millisecond, microsecond, or nanosecond?
Or is it supposed to be 56 million per cc, or mm^3, etc?
The ISM (space) contains .1 to 1,000,000 ions, atoms, or molecules per cc (cubic cm).
56,000,000 photons per cubic meter would be only 56 photons per cc.
Aren't the B-photons supposed to make up 95% of the mass of the ISM?
The air around us is said to contain 10^19 molecules per cc.
That's 10,000,000,000,000,000,000 molecules per cc or 10 billion billion molecules per cc.
Where did you get your number?
Howdy, Lloyd. In the section you copied above [4] is the appropriate reference - if you scroll to the bottom of the page that has the link to the relevant paper. Miles didn't have this calculation in his paper, but it's just basic mathematics to get it.

Perhaps I didn't make myself clear enough - this is Miles's calculation of how many particles there are FOR THE ENTIRE (detectable) UNIVERSE. As we have seen, especially over the last couple of decades with rapid advancements in radio astronomy especially, the makeup of the detectable Universe is extremely non-uniform - matter is highly concentrated in webs of galaxies connected by massive Birkeland currents, which are in turn made up of strings of stars in slightly less massive Birkeland currents. So the concentration in the areas we're living in are vastly higher than this average (and orders of magnitude higher again on planets), and vastly lower in the gaps between galaxies that aren't part of the web.

Lloyd
Posts: 5413
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 9:54 pm

Re: A (near) Complete model of the Universe

Unread post by Lloyd » Wed Jun 08, 2022 11:41 pm

Pete, the reference doesn't say where you get the 56 million B-photons per cubic meter.
And you also need to specify over what time period you'd find that number of photons.
Also, I think it's more comprehensible to say it's 56 B-photons per cc.
Even within great Voids there must be more B-photons than that, because there should be nothing there obstructing the view of the universe.

User avatar
purplepete
Posts: 21
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2021 1:43 pm
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: A (near) Complete model of the Universe

Unread post by purplepete » Thu Jun 09, 2022 7:21 am

Lloyd wrote: Wed Jun 08, 2022 1:46 am MILES VS EU

Pete, have you read Miles' papers about the Electric Universe?
Yes, I've read them. Miles has a lot of ideas about the world in general and the people within it; I'm only interested in discussing Miles's work on mathematics, physics and to a lesser extent art (as it pertains to physics, mainly). There's also a lot of Miles's work I won't discuss because I don't believe that I have the necessary skills/knowledge (currently) to be confident of being able to provide informative commentary.

For example, whilst I never agreed with Miles's first two models of gravity, I'm still trying to wrap my head around his third idea - I think it's potentially worthwhile in terms of explaining the difference between static and moving friction (still working on that), but still trying to grok the rest of the implications - that's one of the reasons I don't address gravity on my website.
Lloyd wrote: Wed Jun 08, 2022 1:46 am STACKED SPINS
...
PARTICLES
...
Thanks for those sections; I'll need some time to digest that and get back to you.

User avatar
purplepete
Posts: 21
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2021 1:43 pm
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: A (near) Complete model of the Universe

Unread post by purplepete » Thu Jun 09, 2022 7:34 am

Lloyd wrote: Wed Jun 08, 2022 3:58 pm B-PHOTON DENSITY
I see I repeated myself a little in my last post.
Pete, on your site under The B-photon, or Charge, at https://thehonestscientist.com/miles-mathis/ you said:
"Space is full of them [bombarding photons] (averaging around 56 million per cubic meter), and Miles refers to the sum total of them as the 'charge field'.
"– if we scaled up the B-photon to the size of a human there would only be around 100 of them in the entire galaxy [4]."

That seems like an impossibly low figure.
Is that 56 million per m^3 per second, or millisecond, microsecond, or nanosecond?
Or is it supposed to be 56 million per cc, or mm^3, etc?
The ISM (space) contains .1 to 1,000,000 ions, atoms, or molecules per cc (cubic cm).
56,000,000 photons per cubic meter would be only 56 photons per cc.
Aren't the B-photons supposed to make up 95% of the mass of the ISM?
The air around us is said to contain 10^19 molecules per cc.
That's 10,000,000,000,000,000,000 molecules per cc or 10 billion billion molecules per cc.
Where did you get your number?
Ahh, I see what you mean now. The paragraph above this section on the website refers to [2,3,6] and that has the reference to 56 million per cubic metre (in [3]) so I didn't reference that again; [4] is the maths. I'll put the extra refs in to make it clearer. I was copying Miles but you're right; 56/cc is a bit clearer so will put that in as well. Check out [3] http://milesmathis.com/photon3.pdf and see if you think the number is still too low.

Lloyd
Posts: 5413
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 9:54 pm

Re: A (near) Complete model of the Universe

Unread post by Lloyd » Thu Jun 09, 2022 2:20 pm

Okay, Pete, you suggested I read http://milesmathis.com/photon3.pdf to see how Miles got a charge density of 56/cc. Here's a relevant excerpt.
c^9 = r{photon}^4/D^6 [D is charge density]
That represents c as a function of the radius of the photon and the charge density. I think that pretty much answers the question I was asked.
But let's solve that equation for D, to see what the average density of the charge field is:
D^3 = r{photon}^2/√c^9
D = 1.54(10^-29 kg/m^3)
That seems about right, since it would be about 56 million photons per cubic meter.
It looks like this portion is calculated right, but I'm not analyzing yet how he got the first equation in this quote involving c, r{photon} & D.
For now I just want to comment that even in interstellar space the B-photon density has to be greater than that. Here's what I said earlier: "The ISM (space) contains .1 to 1,000,000 ions, atoms, or molecules per cc (cubic cm)." Miles says the charge density is 19 times the matter density, so 56/19=~3. So for matter density of 3 or less per cc, that would work, but for any greater matter density, the charge density would be way short, which would apply to most of space. I also said earlier: "The air around us is said to contain 10^19 molecules per cc." So the charge density in our air would have to be 19 times greater than the density of those 10^19 molecules.
Right?
Also, isn't 56 meaningless without knowing how much time is involved? 56 B-photons per second would be a lot more than 56 per minute, hour, day, or year.

Lloyd
Posts: 5413
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 9:54 pm

Re: A (near) Complete model of the Universe

Unread post by Lloyd » Fri Jun 10, 2022 1:38 am

I said lastly:
Also, isn't 56 meaningless without knowing how much time is involved? 56 B-photons per second would be a lot more than 56 per minute, hour, day, or year.
I'm figuring now that in order for a cc (cubic cm) to have a steady supply of 56 B-photons on average, it would have to be receiving and losing 56c B-photons/cm = 56 x 3 x 10^10 B-photons / s. Am I right? It seems to make quite a bit more sense looking at the problem that way.

However, I still think it would have to depend on the mass of the matter within each cc, in order for the charge field to have 19 times the mass of matter. Do you agree?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests