Translate this blog

Wednesday, November 27, 2019

Post #112 TIME according to Albert Einstein and he is wrong

Albert Einsein said the distinction beween the past, the present and the future is an illusion citing several examples from far away galaxies to the present moment here.  He is there talking like there is a Universal time. He also said time is relative in his theories. So, he can't say events at galaxies in relation to events now at somewhere else. Einstein also said we see events happening at far away stars in the present are from the past as light from those stars takes time to reach us to give vision. As time has local emergence and is relative, how can we say past, present and future on a Universal scale ? So, Einstein wronged himself. I would say distinction between past, present and future are real. Stars far away has its own past, present and future. We, here at earth have our own past, present and future. Einstein said distinction between past, present and future is illusion by taking TIME at far away galaxy and here on earth as a common TIME.But he also said TIME is relative and local emerging or there is no such thing as Universal TIME. So, clearly he contradicted himself. So, TIME is not an illusion. There is clear distinction between past, present and future.

Sunday, September 8, 2019


They say TIME is an illusion. To me, TIME is the ultimate connection between a conscious mind & it's surroundings, reality and the Universe. Without TIME, it's impossible to bridge a MIND and external world. TIME bridges the INTERNAL and EXTERNAL worlds.
When a mind look at energy, mass, matter or anything, it need a TIME factor associated with those things to comprehend any meaning out of it. To me, it is because TIME is a property of ENERGY. And we know MASS, MATTER, ANYTHING or the UNIVERSE is made up of ENERGY. TIME is essential to MIND and REALITY to make connection and meaning out of anything.

Wednesday, July 31, 2019

Post #110 Everything is relative and Nothing exist outside trinity.

Everything is relative. Because it is a Universe of interconnections. And Nothing exist outside trinity. Because everything is measurable.

Wednesday, July 24, 2019

Post #109 My idea of GRAVITY.

My idea of GRAVITY briefed here on my 3 blogs is extension of ISSAC NEWTON's GRAVITY.
GRAVITY is the pull or push happening outwards or inwards due to high vibrations happening inside a thing at sub-atomic level. The high vibrations are intense in volume for a small area of SPACE it occurs and it gives a pull or push outwards or inwards as the case may be. This point of balance is also the point where MASS, TEMPERATURE and GRAVITY arises.


First there is ENERGY. Then FORCE with a direction. Then ENERGY and FORCE together creates a high vibrational field. The resultant is called MASS.That is what we see with naked eyes.

Thursday, June 27, 2019

Post #107 GRAVITY and MASS

In my opinion, at some point in SPACE-TIME-TEMPERATURE,  vibrations inside particles become balanced to get concentrated to a point resulting in GRAVITY and the thus it gets SHAPE and MASS also.

Tuesday, June 25, 2019

Post #106 Forces and its interaction with Mass and Energy

I would say with conviction that Theory of Relativity and the phenomenons it explains are simply about the 4 fundamental FORCEs and its effect on ENERGY and MASS. But Albert Einstein completely ignored strong force and weak force( newly discovered forces at that time ) and Theory of Relativity was built without taking the effects of these 2 FORCEs. This clearly has effects on Relativity as it made things very complex, while those phenomenons could have been easily explained by 4 FORCEs and its effect on ENERGY and MASS. For example : the phenomenon of length contraction is due to the effect of 4 FORCEs on ENERGY and MASS on the respective flying object, its body and components and the surroundings in which its flying or the planet or the space. If the flying object is made of metal, it's body will contract according its properties, which are determined by the 3 fundamental forces and the gravitational force of the respective atmosphere. Here speed of the vehicle is determined by ENERGY and MASS along with FORCE also. If the flying object is made of wood, length contraction differs as flying body has different composition of materials which are determined by the 3 fundamental forces and the gravity of the atmosphere.Speed of the vehicle also determined by FORCE, ENERGY, MASS of fuel and the push and pull created inside engine, atmosphere etc. If the flying object is made of diamond, length contraction differs according to the diamond's composition which is being determined by the 3 forces again and the gravity of the atmosphere. Speed of the vehicle also determined by FORCE, ENERGY, MASS of fuel and the push and pull created inside engine, atmosphere etc. It has very little to do with RELATIVITY.

Thursday, June 20, 2019

Post #105 Excited Photons breaking speed limit.

Recently I heard scientists were able to slow down the speed of light or photon drastically. So, it must be also possible to amplify the speed of light or Photon to travel faster than 3 lakh km/sec. I think this proces is what happened at the time of big bang where things travelled faster than light.

Post #104 I would like to say Theory of Relativity is a wrong concept.

I would say RELATIVITY or Theory of Relativity is a concept derived from an era where the concept of FORCEs were not fully developed like that of today. I am ready to explain any phenomenon explained by Relativity Theorom with the help of FORCEs and the ratios with which it interact with ENERGY and MASS as the case may be. So I propose a new Theory Of Force to replace Theory of Relativity.

Tuesday, June 18, 2019

Post #103 Feeling of roatation, revolution not happening to humans because of insignificant gravitional force of humans.

Humans can't feel the rotation and revolution of earth, revoluion of solar system, revolution of galaxy etc because we are also moving along with them. We are also in relative motion. Or that's relativity ? But in my opinion we are too insignificant or our gravitational force is insignificant compared to other gravitational forces of earth, solar system, galaxy, etc to have an interaction to make us the feel of those rotation, revolution etc. Dont you think earth has enough gravitational force to feel it's rotation, revolution etc of its own or to feel the revolution of solar system ? I will say If a human is big enough to have a higher gravitational force due to its mass or energy, he can feel the rotation, revoluition etc of earth, solar system, galaxy etc. as it is then capable of interacting with the gravitational forces of earth, solar system, galaxy etc.

Thursday, June 13, 2019

Post #102 MASS and 3,6,9.

Actually there is only 3 and 6 or ENERGY and FORCE. When these jon together we get MASS. Every form of MATTER is available to 3D beings on earth in th MASS form. 9 is sum of 3 and 6 or ENERGY and MASS. We can see the graphical explanation of this in Vortex Maths. I hope the Physics connection added by me is not wrong.

Saturday, June 8, 2019

Post #101 Theory of Relativity is all about FORCE and its interaction with ENERGY and MASS.

When you travel faster through SPACE, you travel slower through TIME. When you travel slower through SPACE, you travel faster through TIME. That's RELATIVITY.
Previously I said Relativity is all about FORCE and its interaction with ENERGY and MASS.
Let's see whether the above definition of RELATIVITY has any relation with FORCE, ENERGY and MASS.
Travelling faster or slower through SPACETIME depends on FORCE applied by the object, it's ENERGY and MASS. TIME moving slower or faster depends on the effects of FORCE, ENERGY and MASS on the object and the surroundings. Here 4 fundamental FORCEs and its interaction with ENERGY and MASS related to the case. You don't need a concept called RELATIVITY, anything can be explained using 4 FORCEs and its interaction with ENERGY and MASS.

Wednesday, May 22, 2019

Post #100 More on Gravity

Albert Einstein said gravity bend light near stars. Today I said temperture has effect on gravity. What if temperature around stars made the spactime to expand and resulted in the bending of light near to stars ?

Post#99 Gravity in my view

I think in some cases gravity is about energy content, sometimes about mass and sometimes both.
I think temperature is the factor which decides if it's energy or mass.
Will a 5000 kg molten iron ball and 5000 kg iron ball at room temperature have the same gravity ?
Isn't the excited atoms capable of excited energy to give different gravity than non-excited atoms and it's gravity ?
Excited atoms pulls energy outwards to give effect of gravity more outwards than non-excited atoms where it shows gravity interns of its mass.

Thursday, May 2, 2019

Post #98 Observer and existence of reality

An observer is not needed for reality to exist. An observer is just another possibility in the reality defined by space and time. An observer doesn't exist means reality with infinite possibility is existing with just another possibility or reality with observer in another state. If that observer is dead, then still reality exist as observer is present there in another state of energy giving another possibility of reality defined by a different spacetime. Only that observer as a full blown system cease to exist. But still the atoms of the observer's dead body is still conscious in its own rights and capabilities. Reality always exist, only possibilities ceast to exist inside it or differ as it has infinite permutations and combinations. This is my version.

Post #97 Version of realities

What if there is another superior life form on earth above humans with a better and advanced conciousness gives better version of reality ? Then the version of reality given by humans will be not be seen as an ultimate version of reality. Then why particles dont have conciousness in their own rights and capabilities and have their on version of reality ?

Tuesday, April 30, 2019

Post #96 Expansion rate and Age of the Universe under dispute due to latest developments

The universe is expanding faster than it used to, meaning it’s about a billion years younger than we thought, a new study by a Nobel Prize winner says. And that’s sending a shudder through the world of physics, making astronomers re-think some of their most basic concepts.

At issue is a number called the Hubble constant, a calculation for how fast the universe is expanding. Some scientists call it the most important number in cosmology, the study of the origin and development of the universe.
Using NASA’s Hubble Space Telescope, Johns Hopkins University astronomer Adam Riess concluded in this week’s Astrophysical Journal that the figure is 9% higher than the previous calculation, which was based on studying leftovers from the Big Bang.
The trouble is, Riess and others think both calculations are correct.
Confused? That’s OK, so are the experts.
They find the conflict so confounding that they are talking about coming up with “new physics,” incorporating perhaps some yet-to-be-discovered particle or other cosmic “fudge factors” like dark energy or dark matter.
“It’s looking more and more like we’re going to need something new to explain this,” said Riess, who won the2011 Nobel in physics.
NASA astrophysicist John Mather, another Nobel winner, said this leaves two obvious options: “1. We’re making mistakes we can’t find yet. 2. Nature has something we can’t find yet.”
Even with the discovery, life continues on Earth the way it always has. But to astrophysicists trying to get a handle on our place in this expanding universe, this is a cosmic concern.
To come up with his measurement of the Hubble constant, Riess looked to some not-so-distant stars.
Riess observed 70 Cepheid stars — stars that pulse at a well-observed rate — calculated their distance and rate, and then compared them with a certain type of supernovae that are used as measuring sticks. It took about two years for the Hubble telescope to make these measurements, but eventually Riess calculated an expansion rate of 74.
Using that 74 figure means the universe is somewhere between 12.5 billion and 13 billion years old. That’s much younger than the established estimates of 13.6 billion to 13.8 billion.
“Hey, it’s good news. Everybody likes to look younger,” Riess said.
In 2013, the European Planck satellite helped scientists come up with a much slower expansion rate of about 67, but that was done in an entirely different, more complicated and less direct way and by looking at a much earlier time, when the universe was just a toddler.
The Planck team studied background radiation from a time just 370,000 years after the Big Bang. By examining cold and hot spots in that radiation, scientists figured out how big the spots were, which helped them determine how far away they were looking.
That team then fed those calculations into the standard model that astronomers use for the universe — based on Einstein’s general relativity, among other things — factored in the known acceleration of the universe and came up with the smaller expansion rate. The end result: a 13.8-billion-year-old universe.
Riess calculated the odds that the disparity between the two calculations was an accident at 1 in 100,000.
While there is a chance either the Riess team or the Planck team is off, astronomers are talking about both being right.
Both calculations make sense and “nobody can find anything wrong at this point,” said distinguished University of Chicago astrophysicist Wendy Freedman. Other outside experts praised both teams’ research.
If that’s the case, astrophysicists need to make adjustments in Einstein’s general relativity theory.
“You need to add something into the universe that we don’t know about,” said Chris Burns, an astrophysicist at the Carnegie Institution for Science. “That always makes you kind of uneasy.′
In the past, astronomers added hard-to-fathom dark energy and dark matter to explain why calculations didn’t add up, borrowing from a once-discarded Einstein theory. Now they’re saying they need to do something similar again.
It could be there’s an extra “turbocharge” from a past odd pulse of dark energy — an unseen expansion force that fits well in Einstein’s theories — that caused the speeded-up expansion, Riess said.
Or there could be a new particle of matter that hasn’t been discovered, Burns said.
“We have this dark sector that already has two ingredients, and maybe we’re discovering a third,” said Planck team member Lloyd Knox of the University of California, Davis. “That’s a scary prospect. Are we just going to always be introducing fudge factors?”
Astronomers at the University of Chicago, led by Freedman, spent five years looking at different stars than Riess to come up with a third calculation of the expansion rate. They just submitted their work to the same journal. Freedman wouldn’t reveal her number but said it is between the two other figures.
Twenty years ago, Freedman was part of similar debate about the Hubble constant, when there were few measurements to work with.
“It’s an exciting journey to try to understand what the origin of the universe is,” she said.

Thursday, April 25, 2019

Post #95 Curving of Space

Space can curve ? Does that mean space is an emergent property ? Isn't the energy contained inside space which is curving ? Yes, space and energy are inseparable. Does that mean two things have same properties ? If space can be portrayed by the property of energy, why space and energy are seen as diffeent aspects ?

Friday, April 12, 2019

Post #94 What is TIME ?

What is TIME ?
TIME is the ageing of ENERGY in relation to surroundings or surrounding ENERGY or an OBSERVER or OBSERVER'S surrounding.

Wednesday, March 20, 2019

Post #93 Gravity according to Theory of Relativity.

Will the spacetime curvature due to gravity of 578568 Kg mass of cotton ball and 578568 Kg mass of Iron ball the same according to Theory Of Relativity ?

Post #92 Information transfer rates and delays in happening of events to the observer.

 Its not that two events cant happen at two different places at the same time, be it in our lives or outer space. It is the delay in the information about the happening of the event reaches the other point bit late. I feel we will have different rates for this delay depending on the methods we adopt to grasp this information. This different rates can be seen across many things in the Universe, ranging from normal incidents in our lives in which we use various messenger things to inform like postal mail, email, radio, internet to galactic events which gives us information through light travelled from the event, heat, radio waves to events that can give us information where faster than light travelling of things happen which can act as messengers about the details of those events.

Sunday, March 10, 2019

Post #91 Gravity in two types of SPACETIME fabric.

As gravity is curvature of SPACETIME according to Theory of Relativity, are the gravity of two bodies with same mass same, if one body of mass is in a 60 % Vacuum and other in a 30 % Vacuum ?

Saturday, March 9, 2019

Post #90 Gravity according to Theory of Relativity

According to Theory of Relativity, Are the gravity of two planet same, both with 5000 kilometer diameter, but one with a hollow core of 1000 kilometre ?

Sunday, February 24, 2019

Post #89 Delays in getting real time views from a distant source.

If our eyes have ultra power vision to see across several light years distance, will the light from several light years distance still need to reach us to get vision from such far distances without delay from real time occurings? Is it about our defective vision that stars several million kilo metres away could be seen from its past/we get delayed vision or is it about light travelling from that distance should reach us to give us delayed vision from the source of the view of stars ?

Sunday, February 10, 2019

Post #88 Infrared picture of an object many light years away.

Imagine if the whole Universe is totally dark and, if there is a giant thermal camera big enough and that thermal camera giving the picture of an object many light years away. How is that thermal picture of that object different from normal picture of an object in light conditions many light years away ? Is it the same result we get if we study both the pictures to calculate the age of the Universe ?

Sunday, January 13, 2019

Post #87 The idea of F-E-M and its various forms.

Take the number 65 for example. Can you see 3 parts in that number ?
65.01 to 65.33
65.34 to 65.66
65.67 to 65.99
Like wise anything in this world can be divided into 3 parts. We can divide anything into more than 3 parts. But they only come under the sub-division or related with 3.
The base — with little movement or the things which are defined by the quantities of SPACE or ENERGY.
The motion — with more movement or more energy which gives a meaningful direction or the things or activities defined by quantities of TIME or FORCE
The tranformed form or the height of the energy form — with much more energy and movement to form a balance to make relation to our peace wishing senses or the things or activities which can be defined by TEMPERATURE or MASS.
We know that MASS is a result of ENERGY-FORCE balance or acting together. If we add ENERGY and FORCE in the above said example, we will get MASS or 0.33 + 0.66 = 0.99
In this, we could see ENERGY as SOUL or LIGHT, which makes fundamental of all things. This level is in a sub-sense form.This is the EXISTENTAL level. Because it is the base and there is proof for that. As more ENERGY accumulates over TIME, it becomes FORCE or MIND or MOTION/MOVEMENT and becomes sense level thing and can relate with external universe. So the MIND-SURRROUNDING connection comes or RELATIVITY exists. Then further addition of ENERGY combined with FORCE or SOUL combined with MIND becomes BODY or MASS or highest form of stable form of MATTER. Thus SPACE-TIME-TEMPERATURE trio continuum holding ENERGY-FORCE-MASS trinity becomes able to different forms of MATTER called ATOM, ELEMENT, MOLECULE, SYSTEM and so on over TIME under specific ratios which could be understandable and MANIPULATIVE by nature and animals/humans, when we look at it with a MATHEMATICAL, BIOLOGICAL and CHEMICAL view.
So the 3 levels of creation can be identfied as EXISTENTIAL, RELATIVE and MANIULATIVE.

Friday, January 11, 2019

Post #86 One of the mystery in Physics - Number 137