SPUE Theory

[JohnnyW]

Some highlights: Increasing Entropy locally increases Order universally. Sub-sub-sub-atomic Particles Universally Emanated (SPUE) coalesce to form light, energy, and even dark matter. SPUE is superlight-weight and gravity & magnetism are artifacts of SPUE wind from atoms, planets, stars, galaxies. Also, No Big Bang -- a balanced "steady state" life-cycle system that makes sense --- just your typical 400-year paradigm shift kind of stuff.

The SPUE Theory web page presents ideas surrounded by quotes and anectdotes to communicate to grade school teachers. It's not that I'm afraid of the math -- it's just not appropriate at this stage of discussion. I'm a mathematician by education. If you want to know about me, see the Chapter about me - "Would you buy a Used Unified Field Theory from This Man?" (http://www.spuetheory.com/SPUE%20Theory.htm).

I've been reading Alternate Theories posts hoping to find someone else offering the ideas in SPUE Theory so I could sit back and just watch quietly. That hasn't happened. This is a proposed paradigm shift not an observational confirmation of what has gone before. So, put on your "Let's Pretend" hat and consider this as a "what if" scenario.

If you can cite some counter-examples I'd like to hear them -- but no whining that "That's not what Newton said" or "SPUE Theory mentions 'X' and 'X' is stupid." Read the content or don't bother to chime in. Thanks for your professional restraint. -- Johnny SPUE Theory - Embrace Infinity (http://www.spuetheory.com)

To be fair to the following review, this is a totally revised introduction AFTER the first StarLab post was already submitted.

JohnnyW :rolleyes:

[StarLab]

Well, first of all, the general forum concensus is that you've been cheated of about 30 bucks.You've been swindles. You'd wasted your money. The FinalTheory is truly a horrible read. Only the layperson would fall haplessly into its trap. Take it from the experts: the FinalTheory is crap. So if that's what helped to get you going with SPUE Theory, you gotta start doing it all over again.

[bossman20081]

Ive read a little of your theory and I have a couple questions. (excuse me if its already in it, I dont have enough time to read it all)

-What makes you qualified to write such a theory?
-How is this universal wind blowing; whats causing it?

Thats all for now, Ill check back later.

[JohnnyW]

Dear Bossman--whatever

SPUE Wind is the universal result of sub-sub-sub-atomic particles (yes, an unfounded hypothesis of particles small than neutrinos or quarks -- much like gravity) which are 'spun-off" locally and yet impact universally creating the artifact called gravity.

This is shorter than the three paragraph introduction at the top of this Topic. Was that short enough for you?

For the long version, let me "replay" the FIRST PARAGRAPH of the web page you say you looked at...
========= Quote
Basic Concept of SPUE THEORY: What if the tendency of objects to move towards each other is NOT an attractive force that "pulls" things together (i.e. Gravity)? What if the real force is a constant, universal wind pressure from all the galaxies, stars, and planets? In SPUE Theory, all objects are spinning off mini-micro-sub-atomic particles - like releasing a rock spinning on the end of a string. These Sub-sub-sub-atomic Particles Universally Emanated (SPUE) eventually "push" on all objects (e.g., the rock hits a beach ball). This SPUE Wind is universal and blowing in ALL DIRECTIONS (and all SPEEDS) at once leaving everything in balance, much like the careening atoms that make up the sea of air around us. If you believe this force would be insignificant, learn from the 1654 demonstration by the natural philosopher, Otto von Guericke:
========= End Quote

Credentials? I read more than the titles of works. The reason one needs to know credentials is to be able to dismiss the ideas without having to engage in an open evaluation (read the Velikovsky Affair). Had you read the FOURTH Paragraph of the TOPIC Summary above, I would have hoped you wouldn't have wasted the time that you did spend. If you haven't the time, that's great -- go on to another Topic. -- Yes, a bit ticked-off -- JohnnyW

[(Q)]

These Sub-sub-sub-atomic Particles Universally Emanated (SPUE) eventually "push" on all objects

Ridiculous in the extreme.

Why doesn't the Earth push the moon away?

Why aren't we and everything else on the planet not ejected out into space?

[JohnnyW]

Dear Q,

The Fate of the Universe hangs in the balance - the balance between infinite SPUE output from stars and galaxies where only the smallest, fastest SPUE particles make it to the Earth-Moon system. The orbits of the moon around the Earth and the Earth around the sun are the result of lower, weaker, out-ward pressure (from the object) and its own "SPUE shadow" which causes a NET inward force TOWARDs the object causing the shadow which looks like gravity.

The net force looks like gravity -- the distinction -- the reason for picking a) gravity or B) SPUE Theory (if the consequence is the same) is the SPUE Theory says the force is defined somewhat by the neighborhood in which the object lives. SPUE Theory predicts that BLACK HOLES of the same physical composition will behave differently on nearby objects based on their location -- outer rim versus center of a galaxy. The ONLY force an object can exert is its own minor outflow (or its "pass around" as even Hawkings has admitted to recently for Black Holes) as compared to its shadowing the much stronger universal flow -- both on the macroscopic level and the microscopic level for chemical interactions.

Ridiculous -- perhaps, but I'm finding more and more cases where this paradigm makes more sense than your mysterious attraction to gravity as being a non-ridiculous, "scientific" explanation. -- JohnnyW

[(Q)]

The Fate of the Universe hangs in the balance

I rather suspect the fate of ones sanity hangs in the balance.

the balance between infinite SPUE output from stars and galaxies where only the smallest, fastest SPUE particles make it to the Earth-Moon system.

Serious flaw. If SPUE particles are inconsistent, there would be no orbital paths.

The orbits of the moon around the Earth and the Earth around the sun are the result of lower, weaker, out-ward pressure (from the object) and its own "SPUE shadow" which causes a NET inward force TOWARDs the object causing the shadow which looks like gravity.

So, SPUE can have both inward and outward forces, yet can maintain inconsistency?

SPUE theory is a wealth of contradiction.

The net force looks like gravity

No, it doesn't. Gravity retains consistency and is proportional. SPUE is not.

SPUE Theory says the force is defined somewhat by the neighborhood in which the object lives.

That makes no sense at all.

SPUE Theory predicts that BLACK HOLES of the same physical composition will behave differently on nearby objects based on their location -- outer rim versus center of a galaxy.

That is NOT observed.

The ONLY force an object can exert is its own minor outflow (or its "pass around" as even Hawkings has admitted to recently for Black Holes) as compared to its shadowing the much stronger universal flow -- both on the macroscopic level and the microscopic level for chemical interactions.

I have no idea what you're talking about.

Ridiculous -- perhaps, but I'm finding more and more cases where this paradigm makes more sense than your mysterious attraction to gravity as being a non-ridiculous, "scientific" explanation.

Do you mean the 'non-ridiculous, "scientific" explanation' referred to as General Relativity? Funny how GR is verfied each and every day. Ever hear of GPS?

[bossman20081]

(Q)-
You sure do have a habit of being a little insulting. I saw the same thing on the Wisp Theory thread. I didnt say anything because Im not a moderator, but I believe you have already been warned. Hes still correct nonetheless, Johnny.

Johnny-
I didnt have time because I was about to go out to eat. Anyway, I must not be getting you because you wrote that the planet and stars and everything else was spinning off the particles which create gravity. And if thats so, wouldnt it push it away instead of making things gravitate toward it. I also read somewhere on your site that it eliminated the need for anti-matter, but anti-matter has been proven to exist- ever hear of the opposite of the electron, the positron?

[(Q)]

So, its perfectly acceptable for others to insult our intelligence with complete nonsense simply because they are too lazy to think for themselves... and we are supposed to offer our respect?

:rolleyes:

[bossman20081]

Respect and patience are two different things. You dont have the patience to calmly say "no youre mistaken" and then explain why. Just because someone has a misunderstanding does not give you the right to insult them. Anyway, you cant respect someone for pursueing their interests and learning more about it? I respect anyone who tries to better themselves.

[(Q)]

You dont have the patience to calmly say "no youre mistaken" and then explain why.

Damn straight!

I have absolutely no patience with those who attempt to describe physics concepts well beyond their grasp with wishful thinking.

I respect anyone who tries to better themselves.

Then how can you respect the author of that ridiculous website above?

[bossman20081]

I understand where youre coming from- in fact I agree with you. People are making a website about something they obviously know nothing about. Im just saying if theyre truly interested in something they shouldnt have to be criticized.

BTW I think the people who post these things (this and WISP) are just trying to advertise their websites. Im not saying its wrong, but it sometimes gets annoying. And I also your last post I thought was pretty funny :P

[(Q)]

Im just saying if theyre truly interested in something they shouldnt have to be criticized.

I think that if JohnnyW and Wispy were interested in learning something they would have come here asking questions, for example, in the case of JohnnyW, he could have asked why is gravity a "pulling" force rather than a "pushing" force, and would have received some very good answers.

BTW I think the people who post these things (this and WISP) are just trying to advertise their websites. Im not saying its wrong, but it sometimes gets annoying.

Ah, but it IS wrong. These two individuals have no idea what they're talking about yet have set up websites showcasing their so-called theories. This is the spread of disinformation which can easily confuse a lot of people who actually want to learn something. I find these activities deplorable and I have no respect for those kind of individuals. They are not here to learn but instead to preach, and unfortunately they are preaching pure nonsense.

And I also your last post I thought was pretty funny

Thanks.
:)

[JohnnyW]

Dear Q,

Thank you for your "content" comment. You suggested that I ask why "gravity" is a pulling force rather than a "pushing" force. You got it! I'm asking....

As a note, however, (and you can ignore this in your response to the above query) the point of SPUE Theory is that the "apparent pulling" is, in fact, the result of universal "pushing" that is blocked by neighboring objects.

Can you suggest a test to distinguish between a univeral "pushing force" and a localized "pulling force"? This is the reason I posted here in the first place, to find some good reasons to drop SPUE Theory. -- JohnnyW

[(Q)]

Can you suggest a test to distinguish between a univeral "pushing force" and a localized "pulling force"?

Of course not.

But you could try this one yourself:

http://www.fourmilab.ch/gravitation/foobar/

[JohnnyW]

Dear bossman20081,

I apologize for criticizing your "scanning" of my web site just prior to eating. The fact that you even spend a minute on this site says a lot about you -- all good in my book.

I am guilty of "scanning" too quickly also. I misread the tone of your discussion with "Q" and now see that YOU are the voice of rationality in that dialogue.

Yes, I am writing to promote my web site because I believe I have stumbled (yes stumbled) on a PARADIGM Shift that makes sense. A paradigm shift conversation is NOT advanced by agruing the number of angels who can dance on the head of a pin (i.e. cutting edge in the current paradigm). I came here to find people like you who may have some time to point out flaws in SPUE Theory so I can get off this kick (much to my wife's hopes).

I tried to read the Wisp Interaction Theory pages -- and if my stuff is as confusing as that is to me, then I apologize for that too. I am not discounting Wisp's effort or the elaborate efforts of others that I've seen -- I'm just saying it doesn't connect with me (as yet) as my stuff must offend you and others.

I did "try out" SPUE Theory ideas on grandmothers (per Eintein's direction on my home page) as well as grade school teachers and home-schooled children. If a paradigm shift can't be made with that group, then you might as well start out with higher-order mathematics and confuse everyone (I am a mathematician by training and a Natural Philosopher by choice.) I figured that if I could make SPUE Theory play in Peoria, the scientific community should be given the chance to burst this bubble. So far, (except for you and "Q"s "Just Ask" comment) not much in the way of content counterexamples except those on the order of "Of course the earth is flat, just look around you!".

I am not asking for respect, I am asking for an open evaluation which could lead to counter-examples. I have a real job and responsibilities and writing a short story that spawned SPUE Theory was supposed to be a way to relax and de-stress. As the comments above may show, this is not de-stressing.

Bossman20081, I thank you for your defense of my right to post crap -- yes I believe in the ACLU which my wife despises. But, for want of the kind of feedback I was looking for, this site has not come through for me.

I will no longer monitor this TOPIC. I will check back and monitor OTHER topics on this site. I have found this Forum interesting and am glad it is here.

I have moved my focus to another Forum, however, with people even LESS trained in science than I am and more into OBSERVING first and theorizing second. If you have further comments, please send me a private message on this Forum or check out this other forum:

The Hutchison Effect (See Forum Same Name & Key Wave) (http://www.hutchisoneffect.com/)

Best Wishes -- JohnnyW

[(Q)]

I figured that if I could make SPUE Theory play in Peoria, the scientific community should be given the chance to burst this bubble. So far, (except for you and "Q"s "Just Ask" comment) not much in the way of content counterexamples except those on the order of "Of course the earth is flat, just look around you!".

Perhaps you weren't listening - the scientific community would not give your notion the time of day as it borders on elementary school wishful thinking.

Consider yourself lucky if anyone gives it a chuckle.

[JohnnyW]

Q:

As a Natural Philosopher, even "elementary school wishful thinking" is preferable to none at all. Given your above response... Q.E.D. Have a nice day! ;)

[bossman20081]

Sorry you couldnt find what youre looking for in this forum; maybe it is for the best that you try another forum, this forum hasnt given much thought into your theory, which appears as though you put some thought and time into. By no means does anyone want you to leave though, even Q, Im sure doesnt want you to leave.

[JohnnyW]

Dear Bossman20081,

Thanks for your concern. I will continue to monitor OTHER topics on this site as there are many good ideas to learn from. I just feel no need to respond to non-productive comments. Perhaps sometime in the future some one will find the time and give me some real good counter-examples and I will let SPUE Theory die a quiet death.

This does bring up a point... Is there any way to REMOVE a Topic so that others don't waste their time? :D

[bossman20081]

You can ask a mod to erase it, but they generally wont unless its violating the rules; they prefer to leave it in case someone has something to add to it sometime in the future. Id rather leave it here in case I have something to add to it.

[JohnnyW]

Thanks for the feedback. Let it stay -- someday I hope it will make sense to many more people -- but only time will tell. --Regards JohnnyW

[(Q)]

I just feel no need to respond to non-productive comments.

Why not? We took the time to respond to your non-productive theories.

You appear to fit the bill of a crackpot, in that you're not interested in listening to anyone who doesn't agree with your theory. Setting up a website is just one more nail in the coffin, so to speak.

You also seem to feel that wishful thinking take precedence over reason and rationale and that you have every right to print whatever is in your imagination and attempt to mold it to reality. What's worse is that you expect us to understand and provide salient comment.

At the very least, you should take the time to understand current theories on gravity before attempting to refute and suplant them with your own "visions."

[JohnnyW]

Q.E.D.

[JohnnyW]

To see what reputable sources are saying about the issues I'm raising, go the the SPUE Theory web page and click on the second line: Quick Link to Reputable Sources. (This will bypass the SPUE Theory sections)

I've assembled some recent articles which question the construct of gravity as a well-defined, universal, uniform fact.
SPUE Theory -- Reputable Sources on the subject (http://www.spuetheory.com/)

[(Q)]

JohnnyW is spamming the forums - he should be banned.

[JohnnyW]

Dear Q, you have week to lobby for that position. I'm off to conference in Brussels for a week so you have free rein without contraction. (and this isn't the only forum which I am infecting -- a new paradigm has a lot to add in a number of venues) Have a great week, Q and all! -- JohnnyW