+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Contradictions in Physics and Quantum Mechanics

  1. Link to Post #1
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    1st April 2022
    Language
    Farsi
    Age
    56
    Posts
    8
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 74 times in 9 posts

    Post Contradictions in Physics and Quantum Mechanics

    This is the first of a series of interviews with Qafshinra who has proposed a new paradigm that answers the fundamental questions in Physics and Quantum Mechanics.

    In the episode, he talks about the current state of quantum mechanics and its paradoxes, lack of clear and scientific definitions for basic concepts such as Mass, Dimension, and frequency, and makes an introduction to his alternative theory, which has called the Origami Theory.

    I have his book in PDF and his permission to send anyone who wants to know more.
    Please let me know if you wish to have acopy of the book and I'll send it to you.

    Click here to listen

    You will be amazed!

  2. The Following 21 Users Say Thank You to kktari For This Post:

    Ankle Biter (29th April 2022), aoibhghaire (27th April 2022), Ba-ba-Ra (27th April 2022), Bill Ryan (27th April 2022), Blastolabs (29th April 2022), Brigantia (27th April 2022), DeDukshyn (27th April 2022), ExomatrixTV (26th April 2022), Harmony (27th April 2022), Inversion (27th April 2022), Johnnycomelately (27th April 2022), Journeyman (28th April 2022), mab777 (27th April 2022), mizo (26th April 2022), O Donna (28th April 2022), RunningDeer (27th April 2022), selinam (27th April 2022), shaberon (28th April 2022), Sue (Ayt) (27th April 2022), Sunny-side-up (5th October 2022), T Smith (26th April 2022)

  3. Link to Post #2
    Netherlands Avalon Member ExomatrixTV's Avatar
    Join Date
    23rd September 2011
    Location
    Netherlands
    Language
    English, Dutch, German, Limburgs
    Age
    57
    Posts
    22,586
    Thanks
    30,552
    Thanked 124,911 times in 20,684 posts

    Default Re: Contradictions in Physics and Quantum Mechanics

    That was already known from the beginning ... that is why they can not find an unifying theory of everything
    Last edited by ExomatrixTV; 26th April 2022 at 23:16.
    No need to follow anyone, only consider broadening (y)our horizon of possibilities ...

  4. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to ExomatrixTV For This Post:

    Ba-ba-Ra (27th April 2022), Bill Ryan (27th April 2022), Inversion (27th April 2022), mizo (26th April 2022), O Donna (28th April 2022), RunningDeer (27th April 2022), shaberon (28th April 2022)

  5. Link to Post #3
    UK Avalon Member mizo's Avatar
    Join Date
    15th September 2021
    Location
    UK -North East
    Language
    English
    Age
    62
    Posts
    571
    Thanks
    2,320
    Thanked 5,987 times in 562 posts

    Default Re: Contradictions in Physics and Quantum Mechanics

    Quote Posted by kktari (here)
    This is the first of a series of interviews with Qafshinra who has proposed a new paradigm that answers the fundamental questions in Physics and Quantum Mechanics.

    In the episode, he talks about the current state of quantum mechanics and its paradoxes, lack of clear and scientific definitions for basic concepts such as Mass, Dimension, and frequency, and makes an introduction to his alternative theory, which has called the Origami Theory.

    I have his book in PDF and his permission to send anyone who wants to know more.
    Please let me know if you wish to have acopy of the book and I'll send it to you.

    Click here to listen

    You will be amazed!
    I'd like to read the book -thank you

  6. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to mizo For This Post:

    Ba-ba-Ra (27th April 2022), Bill Ryan (27th April 2022), Inversion (27th April 2022), RunningDeer (27th April 2022), shaberon (28th April 2022)

  7. Link to Post #4
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    1st April 2022
    Language
    Farsi
    Age
    56
    Posts
    8
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 74 times in 9 posts

    Default Re: Contradictions in Physics and Quantum Mechanics


  8. The Following 15 Users Say Thank You to kktari For This Post:

    avid (27th April 2022), Bill Ryan (27th April 2022), DeDukshyn (27th April 2022), ExomatrixTV (26th April 2022), Harmony (27th April 2022), Inversion (27th April 2022), Johnnycomelately (27th April 2022), mizo (28th April 2022), O Donna (28th April 2022), Richard S. (27th April 2022), ronny (27th April 2022), RunningDeer (27th April 2022), selinam (27th April 2022), shaberon (28th April 2022), Snoweagle (28th April 2022)

  9. Link to Post #5
    Canada Avalon Member Johnnycomelately's Avatar
    Join Date
    14th January 2022
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    Language
    English
    Age
    65
    Posts
    995
    Thanks
    18,501
    Thanked 5,513 times in 974 posts

    Default Re: Contradictions in Physics and Quantum Mechanics

    This is fascinating. I have read the abstract and introduction, and look forward to reading more. Thank you!

  10. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Johnnycomelately For This Post:

    avid (27th April 2022), Bill Ryan (27th April 2022), Harmony (27th April 2022), Inversion (27th April 2022), RunningDeer (27th April 2022), shaberon (28th April 2022), Snoweagle (28th April 2022), Sue (Ayt) (27th April 2022)

  11. Link to Post #6
    UK Avalon Member samsdice's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th February 2015
    Location
    Southport
    Age
    63
    Posts
    67
    Thanks
    477
    Thanked 447 times in 65 posts

    Default Re: Contradictions in Physics and Quantum Mechanics

    I've read a bit of the book and there's some extremely funny bits in it. Lots of chuckles :-) Thanks....

  12. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to samsdice For This Post:

    avid (27th April 2022), Bill Ryan (27th April 2022), Johnnycomelately (27th April 2022), RunningDeer (27th April 2022), shaberon (28th April 2022)

  13. Link to Post #7
    United States Avalon Member RunningDeer's Avatar
    Join Date
    6th February 2012
    Location
    Forest Dweller
    Language
    English
    Posts
    18,341
    Thanks
    127,398
    Thanked 168,292 times in 18,139 posts

    Default Re: Contradictions in Physics and Quantum Mechanics

    Quote Posted by kktari (here)
    [URL="Here is the link to the book.
    [PDF]https://standuphistorian.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/Origami-Book-Public-Version.pdf[/PDF]"]
    Thank you, kktari.
    Direct link correction.

  14. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to RunningDeer For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (27th April 2022), Johnnycomelately (27th April 2022), O Donna (28th April 2022), shaberon (28th April 2022), Snoweagle (28th April 2022)

  15. Link to Post #8
    UK Avalon Member Mike Gorman's Avatar
    Join Date
    31st May 2010
    Location
    Perth, Western Australia
    Language
    English
    Age
    65
    Posts
    1,868
    Thanks
    5,827
    Thanked 13,983 times in 1,749 posts

    Default Re: Contradictions in Physics and Quantum Mechanics

    Small editorial gripe here, why do people write such long paragraphs? The simple effort of breaking your thoughts into nice digestible, logical blocks gives the reader a much easier time.
    This might seem quibbling, or trivial to some but this one minor correction to how you present your ideas can make an enormous difference to the reception.
    Rant over.

  16. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Mike Gorman For This Post:

    avid (27th April 2022), Bubu (27th April 2022), ExomatrixTV (27th April 2022), O Donna (28th April 2022), RunningDeer (27th April 2022), shaberon (28th April 2022), Snoweagle (28th April 2022)

  17. Link to Post #9
    Philippines Avalon Member
    Join Date
    29th May 2013
    Age
    58
    Posts
    3,059
    Thanks
    4,661
    Thanked 13,263 times in 2,725 posts

    Default Re: Contradictions in Physics and Quantum Mechanics

    Quote Posted by Mike Gorman (here)
    Small editorial gripe here, why do people write such long paragraphs? The simple effort of breaking your thoughts into nice digestible, logical blocks gives the reader a much easier time.
    This might seem quibbling, or trivial to some but this one minor correction to how you present your ideas can make an enormous difference to the reception.
    Rant over.
    Now thats a good rule and npn just a THEORY.
    Truth dwells in splicity wjile deciet hide in complexity. I did not read the book I ve have read a few in my lifetime all of them a waste of time except one

  18. The Following User Says Thank You to Bubu For This Post:

    shaberon (28th April 2022)

  19. Link to Post #10
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    1st April 2022
    Language
    Farsi
    Age
    56
    Posts
    8
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 74 times in 9 posts

    Default Re: Contradictions in Physics and Quantum Mechanics

    Thank you all for your replies and feedback. This is the link to the next episode of my interview. In this episode Qafshinra talsks about the law and order in the universe and intelligent design:

    Click here to listen

    ¤=[Post Update]=¤

    Quote Posted by Mike Gorman (here)
    Small editorial gripe here, why do people write such long paragraphs? The simple effort of breaking your thoughts into nice digestible, logical blocks gives the reader a much easier time.
    This might seem quibbling, or trivial to some but this one minor correction to how you present your ideas can make an enormous difference to the reception.
    Rant over.
    I agree with you 100%. I personally started editing the long paragraphs (with his permission).

  20. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to kktari For This Post:

    O Donna (28th April 2022), shaberon (28th April 2022)

  21. Link to Post #11
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    1st April 2016
    Posts
    4,332
    Thanks
    16,231
    Thanked 21,183 times in 3,983 posts

    Default Re: Contradictions in Physics and Quantum Mechanics

    Interesting. Going from the abstract, it is approximately the same thing I wrote thirty years ago as a paper. Perhaps not identical, but similar.


    This one sounds kind of axiomatic, un-proofing and re-proofing.


    I have a few reactions on the surface of it.

    Firstly, I don't believe you can get the ultimate answers with physical measuring devices. That is all physics can do, tell you how to measure something. Here they have said Time is the only possible measurement (dimension). My view is that the only realistic measuring apparatus is the human organism.

    Our yoga view is exactly this, that Time is quantized or "digitized"--which is defined in physics as the smallest energy transfer that can be measured--which takes place in something like 10 ^-34 seconds. This is the Planck scale and so if it is physically significant, it has to do with Black Body Radiation (i. e. light).

    Like the superposition of the electron, we say that consciousness re-creates the cosmos with every tick of that quantum, which is the Creator of most religions, except the goal of yoga is Brahman, which has two forms, Time, and No Time.

    Apparent motion that is perceived and perhaps subsequently measured by instruments, etc., is really just changing states of consciousness in the quantum sea of Time.


    Secondly we have a pretty coherent picture that Isaac Newton was originally a Natural Scientist, which includes, among other things, Astrology, and so it would be a type of science related to consciousness.


    This can be shown to historically have been paved over by "vested interests" many times. Calculus as Newton developed it was used to replace matrices as used by Leibiniz, which were involved with something like twenty kinds of force equations. Now, most people are just given the result, that there are Four Forces having calculus equations.

    Of course, those forces are contradictory, as the subject of the book appears to say. And so Maxwell's quarternions are posted somewhere in General Science I think, and, it is this vein which Tesla was working in. That would seem to be at least a hint that the "standard model" might be inadequate.

    It is approximately close, but, for instance, a black hole cannot even be observed. You cannot measure it. Tectonic plate drift is unobservable because it is too slow for even generations of scientists to show. 96% of "mass" is unobservable.


    Newton's spectrum is actually a special case.

    And so Isaac Newton was a Natural Scientist, but, at that time, there came to be a new institution of Materialism, which is mainly based in ignoring consciousness, until eventually getting around to telling you maybe it is some random incident in a lucky recipe of electro-chemical primordial soup. If you want to talk about it, go to someone who is more like a medical doctor.

    The equivalent of consciousness at that time was the old institution wherein Bishop Ussher had recently announced that the world had been created not much more than 3,000 B. C., and there was widespread belief that the devil was in the telescope, and so on. If you did not admire their views, you could wind up in the stocks, pillory, boot, or something.

    Newton was very much the end of the line of alchemy and astrology and so on, and you can see what comes from universities from the 1700s on.


    I don't know if that is where this book is going, but that is what comes off the top of my head from what sounds like very similar subjects.




    Edit: a few pages in, it strikes me as odd that something which may "re-write Physics" axiomatically accepts the Big Bang. In other words you have to argue this against Steady State. Also, it is re-defininf mass as non-existent, or, as the result of Time x Gravity.


    Here we would say ultimately there is no "solid mass", but, there are the presence of electrical forces. This is the perpetual actor in a Steady State environment.

    Does this go on to address these issues?
    Last edited by shaberon; 28th April 2022 at 06:26.

  22. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to shaberon For This Post:

    Johnnycomelately (28th April 2022), O Donna (28th April 2022), RunningDeer (28th April 2022)

  23. Link to Post #12
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    1st April 2022
    Language
    Farsi
    Age
    56
    Posts
    8
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 74 times in 9 posts

    Default Re: Contradictions in Physics and Quantum Mechanics

    Quote Posted by shaberon (here)
    Interesting. Going from the abstract, it is approximately the same thing I wrote thirty years ago as a paper. Perhaps not identical, but similar.


    This one sounds kind of axiomatic, un-proofing and re-proofing.


    I have a few reactions on the surface of it.

    Firstly, I don't believe you can get the ultimate answers with physical measuring devices. That is all physics can do, tell you how to measure something. Here they have said Time is the only possible measurement (dimension). My view is that the only realistic measuring apparatus is the human organism.

    Our yoga view is exactly this, that Time is quantized or "digitized"--which is defined in physics as the smallest energy transfer that can be measured--which takes place in something like 10 ^-34 seconds. This is the Planck scale and so if it is physically significant, it has to do with Black Body Radiation (i. e. light).

    Like the superposition of the electron, we say that consciousness re-creates the cosmos with every tick of that quantum, which is the Creator of most religions, except the goal of yoga is Brahman, which has two forms, Time, and No Time.

    Apparent motion that is perceived and perhaps subsequently measured by instruments, etc., is really just changing states of consciousness in the quantum sea of Time.


    Secondly we have a pretty coherent picture that Isaac Newton was originally a Natural Scientist, which includes, among other things, Astrology, and so it would be a type of science related to consciousness.


    This can be shown to historically have been paved over by "vested interests" many times. Calculus as Newton developed it was used to replace matrices as used by Leibiniz, which were involved with something like twenty kinds of force equations. Now, most people are just given the result, that there are Four Forces having calculus equations.

    Of course, those forces are contradictory, as the subject of the book appears to say. And so Maxwell's quarternions are posted somewhere in General Science I think, and, it is this vein which Tesla was working in. That would seem to be at least a hint that the "standard model" might be inadequate.

    It is approximately close, but, for instance, a black hole cannot even be observed. You cannot measure it. Tectonic plate drift is unobservable because it is too slow for even generations of scientists to show. 96% of "mass" is unobservable.


    Newton's spectrum is actually a special case.

    And so Isaac Newton was a Natural Scientist, but, at that time, there came to be a new institution of Materialism, which is mainly based in ignoring consciousness, until eventually getting around to telling you maybe it is some random incident in a lucky recipe of electro-chemical primordial soup. If you want to talk about it, go to someone who is more like a medical doctor.

    The equivalent of consciousness at that time was the old institution wherein Bishop Ussher had recently announced that the world had been created not much more than 3,000 B. C., and there was widespread belief that the devil was in the telescope, and so on. If you did not admire their views, you could wind up in the stocks, pillory, boot, or something.

    Newton was very much the end of the line of alchemy and astrology and so on, and you can see what comes from universities from the 1700s on.


    I don't know if that is where this book is going, but that is what comes off the top of my head from what sounds like very similar subjects.




    Edit: a few pages in, it strikes me as odd that something which may "re-write Physics" axiomatically accepts the Big Bang. In other words you have to argue this against Steady State. Also, it is re-defininf mass as non-existent, or, as the result of Time x Gravity.


    Here we would say ultimately there is no "solid mass", but, there are the presence of electrical forces. This is the perpetual actor in a Steady State environment.

    Does this go on to address these issues?
    I forwarded your post to him. I'll post it here as soon as I hear back. Thank you

  24. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to kktari For This Post:

    Johnnycomelately (29th April 2022), shaberon (29th April 2022)

  25. Link to Post #13
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    1st April 2022
    Language
    Farsi
    Age
    56
    Posts
    8
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 74 times in 9 posts

    Default Re: Contradictions in Physics and Quantum Mechanics

    Quote Posted by kktari (here)
    Quote Posted by shaberon (here)
    Interesting. Going from the abstract, it is approximately the same thing I wrote thirty years ago as a paper. Perhaps not identical, but similar.


    This one sounds kind of axiomatic, un-proofing and re-proofing.


    I have a few reactions on the surface of it.

    Firstly, I don't believe you can get the ultimate answers with physical measuring devices. That is all physics can do, tell you how to measure something. Here they have said Time is the only possible measurement (dimension). My view is that the only realistic measuring apparatus is the human organism.

    Our yoga view is exactly this, that Time is quantized or "digitized"--which is defined in physics as the smallest energy transfer that can be measured--which takes place in something like 10 ^-34 seconds. This is the Planck scale and so if it is physically significant, it has to do with Black Body Radiation (i. e. light).

    Like the superposition of the electron, we say that consciousness re-creates the cosmos with every tick of that quantum, which is the Creator of most religions, except the goal of yoga is Brahman, which has two forms, Time, and No Time.

    Apparent motion that is perceived and perhaps subsequently measured by instruments, etc., is really just changing states of consciousness in the quantum sea of Time.


    Secondly we have a pretty coherent picture that Isaac Newton was originally a Natural Scientist, which includes, among other things, Astrology, and so it would be a type of science related to consciousness.


    This can be shown to historically have been paved over by "vested interests" many times. Calculus as Newton developed it was used to replace matrices as used by Leibiniz, which were involved with something like twenty kinds of force equations. Now, most people are just given the result, that there are Four Forces having calculus equations.

    Of course, those forces are contradictory, as the subject of the book appears to say. And so Maxwell's quarternions are posted somewhere in General Science I think, and, it is this vein which Tesla was working in. That would seem to be at least a hint that the "standard model" might be inadequate.

    It is approximately close, but, for instance, a black hole cannot even be observed. You cannot measure it. Tectonic plate drift is unobservable because it is too slow for even generations of scientists to show. 96% of "mass" is unobservable.


    Newton's spectrum is actually a special case.

    And so Isaac Newton was a Natural Scientist, but, at that time, there came to be a new institution of Materialism, which is mainly based in ignoring consciousness, until eventually getting around to telling you maybe it is some random incident in a lucky recipe of electro-chemical primordial soup. If you want to talk about it, go to someone who is more like a medical doctor.

    The equivalent of consciousness at that time was the old institution wherein Bishop Ussher had recently announced that the world had been created not much more than 3,000 B. C., and there was widespread belief that the devil was in the telescope, and so on. If you did not admire their views, you could wind up in the stocks, pillory, boot, or something.

    Newton was very much the end of the line of alchemy and astrology and so on, and you can see what comes from universities from the 1700s on.


    I don't know if that is where this book is going, but that is what comes off the top of my head from what sounds like very similar subjects.




    Edit: a few pages in, it strikes me as odd that something which may "re-write Physics" axiomatically accepts the Big Bang. In other words you have to argue this against Steady State. Also, it is re-defininf mass as non-existent, or, as the result of Time x Gravity.


    Here we would say ultimately there is no "solid mass", but, there are the presence of electrical forces. This is the perpetual actor in a Steady State environment.

    Does this go on to address these issues?
    I forwarded your post to him. I'll post it here as soon as I hear back. Thank you
    Here is the response:
    "I am glad that you had thought about a perhaps similar idea. Although, what you have to remember is that :

    1- I have developed this model in its entirety and with all mathematical and physical equations and in a scientific format to be considered as a new model.
    2- What I have shared is the "simple English" version.

    I strongly recommend you study the work and let me know if you have any questions.

    Last but not the lease. If you pay more attention, or listen to my interview, I do not accept Big Bang.

    https://d3ctxlq1ktw2nl.cloudfront.ne...4bbecc6c3e.mp3

    https://d3ctxlq1ktw2nl.cloudfront.ne...82ba6a63d1.mp3


    All the Best,

  26. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to kktari For This Post:

    Johnnycomelately (29th April 2022), O Donna (29th April 2022), shaberon (29th April 2022)

  27. Link to Post #14
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    1st April 2016
    Posts
    4,332
    Thanks
    16,231
    Thanked 21,183 times in 3,983 posts

    Default Re: Contradictions in Physics and Quantum Mechanics

    Quote Posted by kktari (here)
    1- I have developed this model in its entirety and with all mathematical and physical equations and in a scientific format to be considered as a new model.
    2- What I have shared is the "simple English" version.

    I strongly recommend you study the work and let me know if you have any questions.

    Last but not the lease. If you pay more attention, or listen to my interview, I do not accept Big Bang.

    Ok, that is a bit...vague...and so we start by presenting the Big Bang, to unravel it later?

    As Mike Gorman said the style of the text is difficult to handle.

    Science interests me, and I can raise dozens of points already from this forum and using other websites to present them.

    And so this is a bit of peer review, about how you can generate an audience...it needs to be sharpened.

    The prelude is very interesting, that there is one dimension, being time. But say, for example, a Table of Contents, rather than just Chapter One and block text? So I could just glance and see something like Chapter Six, the Big Bang just doesn't work, Chapter Seven, Why EM is derived from gravity...that sort of thing would be more useful than to be recommended to go through the whole thing and ask later.



    On a general readership basis, we can easily get the related nature of Planck Time with a few snippets from Space:

    Planck length is equal to the Planck time multiplied by the speed of light.

    Because the Planck time is so impractically small, it was largely ignored by scientists prior to the 1950s, according to K. A. Tomilin of the Moscow Institute for the History of Science and Technology. At best it was considered an interesting curiosity with no real physical significance. Then, when physicists started looking for a “theory of everything” that would encompass both gravity and quantum mechanics, they realized that the Planck time might have enormous significance after all.

    The key lies in the fact that the Planck time, along with the other Planck units, incorporates both the gravitational constant G and Planck’s constant h, which is central to quantum theory.

    ...is there any mass for which the Schwarzschild radius is exactly equal to the Compton wavelength? It turns out there is – and it’s the Planck mass, for which those two parameters, one from quantum theory and one from general relativity, both equal the Planck length.

    Is this just a coincidence, or does it mean that gravitational and quantum effects really do start to overlap at the Planck scale?

    Some scientists, such as Diego Meschini of Jyvaskyla University in Finland, remain skeptical, but the general consensus is that Planck units really do play a key role in connecting these two areas of physics. One possibility is that spacetime itself is quantized at the level of a Planck length and Planck time. If this is true, then the fabric of spacetime, when looked at on that scale, would appear “chunky” rather than smoothly continuous.

    But it’s widely believed that, given a better understanding of quantum gravity, we’d find that prior to the Planck time gravity was also merged into the other forces. It was only at the Planck time, around 5 × 10^-44 seconds after the Big Bang, that gravity became the separate force we see today.



    So you will notice I personally mis-stated Planck Time by ten billion powers too much. Someone should have seen that. But we can also reverse that last quote: During the first unit of Planck Time, there was only one force, and afterwards, EM and Nuclear separated from Gravity. Then if I frame that with language that says they are only changed appearances of, but not different from or other than Gravity, it sounds like that would be the subject that is being pursued here.

    We see there is a "general consensus" that the Time Quantum probably is extremely fundamental.

    Vacuum Energy has been known as the Casimir Effect since the 1940s, the principle of spontaneous creation and destruction of particle--anti-particle pairs, and since then it has been measured more sensitively, not discovered in the 2000s.

  28. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to shaberon For This Post:

    Johnnycomelately (29th April 2022), O Donna (29th April 2022)

+ Reply to Thread

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts