Be ready for next level of science

[truedream]

"True science” vs “Standard model"

These are some of comments about my theory

magnetfreek Joined: 02 Dec 2006 Posts: 1
Post subject: I think that this be the true meaning of all true science and observable fact. It is clear that the last century was extremely misguided and ignored the crystal clear unsolved magnetic issues. the "standard model" does not even attempt to clearly explain all observable phenomena. the construction of the large hadron collider and experimental fusion reactor are entirely baseless. I highly respect your work and expertise.

Re: true final theory by true science
True science is one that is self-evident, and simple to understand, it is the way of life unfolding, science is about understanding, understanding ourselves, then when we do this we see that true science, is about unfolding the life principle, and revealing the bud, that one day will flower.
regards michael.

Baudrunner 12-09-2006, 09:09 PM
I think that there is Reality Science and Pseudo Science. Your acceptance of the fundamental principle of how paramagnetic molecules line up points to a desire to learn more about real knowledge, and therefore, reality science.
If the vandals hadn't sacked the library at Alexandria almost two thousand years ago, we would all know a whole lot more.
The acquisition of knowledge has followed an Empirical path. Empiricism means; learning from that which has gone before. That is science.
"There is nothing permanent except change"


Daniel Berenyi, 16 Mar 2007
Interesting subject. Relativity made EVERYONE confused about the sunsets first. Then -when the first few brilliant minds realized Earth was turning and Sun was not orbiting our planet -the Great Inquisition had fought the idea.With fire and iron as I recall the fate of Giordano Bruno and Galileo.
Gravity came into our common view after Sir Isaac Newton had been born. Relativity was still very active thus confusion reigned over science and declining religious dogma ever since.
Now is the time to get clear views on gravity -just like we did with sunsets. Falling objects are NOT ACCELERATING. After they hit the ground the fallen objects move SLOWER than before their fall!

Please check the link of online review of truescience at
http://www.toequest.com/forum/toe-th...e-science.html

http://www.toequest.com/forum/toe-th...nce-ready.html
What is theory of every thing ?
Basic law of science which unify all fundamental forces.Yes ,we are searching for basic law of science from advance level, that is we have Already Constracted a big building with out basement or foundation and finally trying to Construct the basement of the building was it possible, even not possible after hundreds and thousands of years by present science, only possible by true science. First we don’t know the clear basic of atom.

The Standard Model is a good theory. Experiments have verified its predictions to incredible precision, and all the particles predicted by this theory have been found. But it does not explain everything. For example, gravity is not included in the Standard Model.
yes, 50% of science is hidden in the name of gravity, that is did present science is 50% incomplete science!!!!

[Swift]

Ok, I'm ready. When will you explain it?

[NEOWatcher]

Ok, I'm ready. When will you explain it?

I back up that comment...

Besides; when should a model explain something? Isn't a model just a way of putting things in order so scientific principles have an easier time with the explainations?

And; When does unification become the entire scope of science?

Lastly; and most importantly; what are your thoughts on these things? Why are you posting this stuff? It makes you sound like a parrot with no independent thought.

[truedream]

Ok, I'm ready. When will you explain it?

What is special about water???

What is proof for antigravity in water???

A material that is strongly attracted to a magnet is said to have a high permeability. Iron and steel are two examples of materials with very high permeability, and they are strongly attracted to magnets. Liquid oxygen is an example of something with a low permeability, and it is only weakly attracted to a magnetic field. Water has such a low permeability that it is actually slightly repelled by magnetic fields.

why water is repelled by magnetic fields?? First,did any one know Clear process of magnet or magnetic field ?

Science had missed important subject magnetism of atom and misunderstood about existence of Magnetism in atom. But Present science have seen the magnetism of atom indirectly in the name of gravity,weight,pressure, density, positive or negatively charged, chemical bonding, etc.

Ok,present gravity of earth was the result of mainly four source of gravity field.Flux of sun (gravity of sun), gravity of solid core, gravity of liquid core and gravity of atmosphere.

Points to remember dont only see the mass its useless, see only the force of it. Let us separate Earth into tree main parts, solid core, liquid core and atmosphere. With respect earth: solid core is made up of high gravity atom, liquid core is made up of semi gravity atom and atmosphere is made up of anti gravity atoms.

[NEOWatcher]

Just about 24 hours... Anyway, I'm still having a difficult time trying to understand what you are trying to say, but I do have a few comments.

Science had missed important subject magnetism of atom and misunderstood about existence of Magnetism in atom. But Present science have seen the magnetism of atom indirectly in the name of gravity,weight,pressure, density, positive or negatively charged, chemical bonding, etc.

What did they miss? All the observations are consistent with the theories.

Ok,present gravity of earth was the result of mainly four source of gravity field.Flux of sun (gravity of sun), gravity of solid core, gravity of liquid core and gravity of atmosphere.

Only 4? it also includes the gravity of the crust, the trees, the ocean, all the little critters, etc.
Otherwise, what is different with the 4 sources you state. Why is there a distinction? They have mass, and the gravity is in proportion to their mass.

Points to remember dont only see the mass its useless, see only the force of it. Let us separate Earth into tree main parts, solid core, liquid core and atmosphere. With respect earth: solid core is made up of high gravity atom, liquid core is made up of semi gravity atom and atmosphere is made up of anti gravity atoms.

If atmosphere is anti-gravity, then we would not have one.

[truedream]

I'm still having a difficult time trying to understand what you are trying to say,What did they miss? All the observations are consistent with the theories..

you better check links given in the above to understand, it is very hard to expline new theory by few words.(english is my second langage)

Only 4? it also includes the gravity of the crust, the trees, the ocean, all the little critters, etc...

dont make fun, i have sad "mainly four" not " only four"
Did you know about ocean? ocean which belongs part to atmosphere.

If atmosphere is anti-gravity, then we would not have one.

Did you know answers for simple Questions
What happen to atmosphere and water of mars???
What can happen to atmosphere and water of earth???

Let us separate Earth into tree main parts, solid core, liquid core and atmosphere. With respect earth: solid core is made up of high gravity atom, liquid core is made up of semi gravity atom and atmosphere is made up of anti gravity atoms.
This liquid core plays important role in planet, from the beginning of planet formation they work as SEMI GRAVITY and SEMI ANTI GRAVITY. This semi anti gravity of liquid core creats dynamo effect and geo magnetism.
This semi gravity of liquid core was controls or capture by solid core.
This semi anti gravity of liquid core controls or capture the anti gravity atmosphere.

so we know Earth has dynamic and self-regulating atmosphere, this is process of recycling the powerful anti gravity atmosphere was down by liquid core (dynamo effect /earths semi anti gravity). When the dynamo effect or earths semi anti gravity stops, that is semi anti gravity atoms of liquid core changes into gravity atom then atmosphere try to escape because of unlike magnetic force.

Yes, the end of dynamo effect / semi anti gravity of liquid core of mars
was the main reason for disappear of atmosphere.

Mars: A Water World? Evidence Mounts, But Scientists Remain Tight-Lipped

Check this links
http://www.space.com/scienceastronom...ce_040229.html
http://www.esa.int/esaMI/Mars_Expres...K75V9ED_0.html

[tusenfem]

Yes, the end of dynamo effect / semi anti gravity of liquid core of mars
was the main reason for disappear of atmosphere.

Mars: A Water World? Evidence Mounts, But Scientists Remain Tight-Lipped

Check this links
http://www.space.com/scienceastronom...ce_040229.html
http://www.esa.int/esaMI/Mars_Expres...K75V9ED_0.html

No, not really. The martian atmosphere was mainly taken away by the solar wind because the magnetic field disappeared.
I would not say that scientists are tight lipped about water on Mars. Every "martian" scientist hopes to show real evidence of flowing water on Mars. And lately the radar data showing the huge ice deposits at the pole of Mars. Guess you had your ears and eyes closed when this was brought to the public. The link you put in your message is from 2004!! Lots of things have happened since then. And scientist cannot just blabber out somthing at the first sign that something may be there, they have to have good evidence, otherwise they will get ridiculed by their colleagues (and rightly so).

Just another unfounded ATM/conspirace theme going on here.

[garykpo]

Just about 24 hours... Anyway, I'm still having a difficult time trying to understand what you are trying to say, but I do have a few comments.


What did they miss? All the observations are consistent with the theories.


Only 4? it also includes the gravity of the crust, the trees, the ocean, all the little critters, etc.
Otherwise, what is different with the 4 sources you state. Why is there a distinction? They have mass, and the gravity is in proportion to their mass.

If atmosphere is anti-gravity, then we would not have one.

you people are crazy think about what you are saying before you say it

[NEOWatcher]

you people are crazy think about what you are saying before you say it

May I point out that Gillianren is correct, this is against the rules, but I am a tolerant person, so I will not get upset about it.

I will only ask you to explain why you say this, and what information do you have to back it up.

But; aside from the personal attack, I am offended that you are spelling America without being capitalized.

The spelling errors in your profile make it hard to take you seriously to begin with.

[papageno]

A material that is strongly attracted to a magnet is said to have a high permeability. Iron and steel are two examples of materials with very high permeability, and they are strongly attracted to magnets. Liquid oxygen is an example of something with a low permeability, and it is only weakly attracted to a magnetic field. Water has such a low permeability that it is actually slightly repelled by magnetic fields.

Paramagnetism, ferromagnetism and diamagnetism.
Look up chapters 34 to 37 in Feynman's Lectures on Physics, Vol. 2.

Science had missed important subject magnetism of atom and misunderstood about existence of Magnetism in atom. But Present science have seen the magnetism of atom indirectly in the name of gravity,weight,pressure, density, positive or negatively charged, chemical bonding, etc.

Have a look at chapter 8 in Eisberg & Resnick's Quantum Physics of Atoms, Molecules, Solids, Nuclei, and Particles.

[Mister Earl]

I just want to say I like how he referrs to "real science" without backing anything up scientifically.

[Mister Earl]

Just noticed this was his first, and ONLY post. Ad bot or something?

[NEOWatcher]

Just noticed this was his first, and ONLY post. Ad bot or something?

I suspected that to, but we haven't even hit the 24 hour mark yet, so I will wait...

[Mister Earl]

You didn't say specifically why you believe that gas atoms are anti-gravatic.

[truedream]

You didn't say specifically why you believe that gas atoms are anti-gravatic.

In my laws, I am comparing the magnetism of nucleus (atomic magnetic force) from micro to macro scale and relation in between them.
Atom has two physical characteristics, one is mass of atom and other is magnetic force of atom. This magnetic force of atom is very important or primary physical characteristics for nature and mass of atom is secondary characteristics for nature.Nature takes care or collects only magnetic force of atom and don’t take care of the mass of atom.

To understand atom, let us imagine a piece of sugar cane is an atom, The juice in sugar cane is magnetic force of atom and wastage of sugar cane with very little amount of juice is mass. So in a planet the collected juice of atom creates the resultant force gravity in the mass of atom.

So primary character of the matter is force (magnetic force) in it and mass is only secondary character of the matter. The gravity or anti gravity of atom is directly proposonal to this magnetic force.
nucleus of all solid atoms have type of magnetic force which i call as solid atomic magnetic force and likewise nucleus of all gas atoms have type of magnetic force which i call as gas atomic magnetic force .

Solid atomic magnetic force and gas atomic magnetic force are opposite to each other so only the bonding in between this two atoms (gas and solid) is very lose.
Simple example to describe the presence of magnetic force in atom is mixture of oil and water, is good example for existence of unlike nucleus magnetic force in liquids.

What is proof for antigravity in water ???
A material that is strongly attracted to a magnet is said to have a high permeability. Iron and steel are two examples of materials with very high permeability, and they are strongly attracted to magnets. Liquid oxygen is an example of something with a low permeability, and it is only weakly attracted to a magnetic field.
Water has such a low permeability that it is actually slightly repelled by magnetic fields.why water is repelled by magnetic fields?? how this low permeability water can reples magnetic field???

Truly water donot have low permeability but it has opposite or anti permeability force in it, that is it has anti gravity force so only it repels.

gravity or anti gravity of an atom is depond upon its place in space (depond upon near by source of gravity feild).for eg: gass atom in our earth (solid planet) works as anti gravity atom but when same gass atom when gos near to sun (gass planet) it works as gravity atom.

Imagine as, gas planet is placed in the place of mercury then what will happen? The sun made of gas atoms will pull the gas planet placed in the place of mercury, because of like atomic magnetic force place near to it. This is the true reason for not present of any gas planet in inner planets.

[NEOWatcher]

You are presenting a lot, so lets start with some building blocks.

Simple example to describe the presence of magnetic force in atom is mixture of oil and water, is good example for existence of unlike nucleus magnetic force in liquids.

Bad example. This is a matter of density, and solubility.
If you have a different view as to how this is, then please explain it.

[truedream]

You are presenting a lot, so lets start with some building blocks.

Bad example. This is a matter of density, and solubility.
If you have a different view as to how this is, then please explain it.

i dont think this as building block because i have new
atomic model, which can expline why partical has weight.

i think you have not checked the links,

Water and oil don't mix because they are two different
kinds of molecules. Water is a polar molecule, which means
one side of the molecule has a positive charge and the
other has a negative charge (just like a bar magnet).
Scientists call polar molecules hydrophilic, which means
they that "love" water, or will mix with water. Oil is a
nonpolar molecule?it doesn't have ends with positive and
negative charges. Scientists call nonpolar molecules
hydrophobic, which means that they "fear" water, or won't
mix well with water.

some of the words in above post:
Science had missed important subject magnetism of atom, But Present science have seen the magnetism of atom indirectly in the name of gravity,weight,pressure, density, positive or negatively charged, chemical bonding, etc.

[NEOWatcher]

i dont think this as building block because i have new
atomic model, which can expline why partical has weight.

But; you need to explain some of the basics of your theory. Here you are only presenting some ideas based on a couple of observed examples. We need to expand what you are saying and see how it applies to other situations.
In other words, we need to build a scientific method of being able to test your idea.

i think you have not checked the links,

Yes I have, and they are only forums with people babbling on and on. What are you sources? What should I look for? How does it support your assumptions.
All you are supplying is: because they say so.

Water and oil don't mix because they are two different kinds of molecules

Can you relate this to other liquids. Can you quantify the effects?

But Present science have seen the magnetism of atom indirectly in the name of gravity,weight,pressure, density, positive or negatively charged, chemical bonding, etc.

Basically, you just said that we can and have tested magnetism in many different ways that are all consistent with each other. Do you have a better way to see it?

[Fortis]

The gravity or anti gravity of atom is directly proposonal to this magnetic force.
nucleus of all solid atoms have type of magnetic force which i call as solid atomic magnetic force and likewise nucleus of all gas atoms have type of magnetic force which i call as gas atomic magnetic force .

Experimentally it has been shown that (for all cases considered) the gravitational force is proportional to mass, and the magnetic force is proportional to the magnetic moment. Have you actually compared meaurements of the magnetic moments and masses of a range of atoms and found that they are directly proportional to each other?

[Fortis]

Experimentally it has been shown that (for all cases considered) the gravitational force is proportional to mass, and the magnetic force is proportional to the magnetic moment. Have you actually compared meaurements of the magnetic moments and masses of a range of atoms and found that they are directly proportional to each other?

True dream, did you have any view on what I had posted?

[truedream]

Experimentally it has been shown that (for all cases considered) the gravitational force is proportional to mass, and the magnetic force is proportional to the magnetic moment. Have you actually compared meaurements of the magnetic moments and masses of a range of atoms and found that they are directly proportional to each other?

The gravitational force is proportional to mass, yes but let us see in Better view.

Better view is the gravitational force is proportional to mass of nucleus.
I say is nucleus of all atoms having new type of magnetic force, that is magnetic property of Nucleus and I call it as atomic magnetic force.

Better view is the gravitational force is directly proportional to magnetic property of nucleus.


Like wise magnetic force is proportional to the magnetic moment.

Better view is present magnetic force is proportional to the mass of electron

Better view is present magnetic force is directly proportional to the mass of anti electron.

Better view is present magnetic force is directly proportional to the magnetic property of anti electron.


So gravity is directly proportional to magnetic property of nucleus (atomic magnetic force).this atomic magnetic force is something different from present magnetic force.

[Fortis]

The gravitational force is proportional to mass, yes but let us see in Better view.

Better view is the gravitational force is proportional to mass of nucleus.
I say is nucleus of all atoms having new type of magnetic force, that is magnetic property of Nucleus and I call it as atomic magnetic force.

Better view is the gravitational force is directly proportional to magnetic property of nucleus.


Like wise magnetic force is proportional to the magnetic moment.

Better view is present magnetic force is proportional to the mass of electron

Better view is present magnetic force is directly proportional to the mass of anti electron.

Better view is present magnetic force is directly proportional to the magnetic property of anti electron.


So gravity is directly proportional to magnetic property of nucleus (atomic magnetic force).this atomic magnetic force is something different from present magnetic force.

Can you provide an example with numbers?

[truedream]

You didn't say specifically why you believe that gas atoms are anti-gravatic.

Because pressure in the gas atoms work against gravity (antigravity)
But pressure in the solid atoms work as its support gravity (gravity)
So we can say two type of pressure exist one is anti gravity pressure and other is gravity pressure.

[cjl]

Because pressure in the gas atoms work against gravity (antigravity)
But pressure in the solid atoms work as its support gravity (gravity)
So we can say two type of pressure exist one is anti gravity pressure and other is gravity pressure.

Actually, the pressure in solids works fairly effectively against gravity, which is why the earth isn't collapsing right now...

[Nereid]

"True science” vs “Standard model"

These are some of comments about my theory

[snip]

(my bold)

By 'theory', do you mean 'speculative idea', or 'guess'? Or 'scientific theory'? Or something else.

If you mean 'scientific theory', can you please give some references to papers which present this theory, in relevant peer-reviewed publications?

[Nereid]

Bumping this post

(my bold)

By 'theory', do you mean 'speculative idea', or 'guess'? Or 'scientific theory'? Or something else.

If you mean 'scientific theory', can you please give some references to papers which present this theory, in relevant peer-reviewed publications?

truedream, it seems that you may have overlooked my questions.

Could you please answer them.

[truedream]

(my bold)

By 'theory', do you mean 'speculative idea', or 'guess'? Or 'scientific theory'? Or something else.

If you mean 'scientific theory', can you please give some references to papers which present this theory, in relevant peer-reviewed publications?

First we don’t have peer-reviewed publications process for basic science and basic laws, because we have passed that age of it 100 or 200 years before.
Now we are in advance level with many branches of science and peer-review process.

"As long as the laws of the mathematics refer to the reality, they are not exact;and while they are exact, they don't refer to the reality.
Imagination is more important than knowledge."

Albert Einstein

[Nereid]

(my bold)

By 'theory', do you mean 'speculative idea', or 'guess'? Or 'scientific theory'? Or something else.

If you mean 'scientific theory', can you please give some references to papers which present this theory, in relevant peer-reviewed publications?

First we don’t have peer-reviewed publications process for basic science and basic laws, because we have passed that age of it 100 or 200 years before.
Now we are in advance level with many branches of science and peer-review process.

First, you didn't answer my question; please do so.

Second, the view in the part of your post that I am quoting here is itself very much an ATM view of the nature of science, in the 21st century.

Unfortunately, BAUT's scope is astronomy and space, so a detailed exposition, together with challenges etc, is beyond the scope of this board. However, if you wish to defend these ATM ideas, re the nature of science, please say so (and I, for one, will ask direct, pertinent questions on those ATM ideas, as you present them).

"As long as the laws of the mathematics refer to the reality, they are not exact;and while they are exact, they don't refer to the reality.
Imagination is more important than knowledge."

Albert Einstein

Other than in the posts in this thread, together with any links to other webpages in those posts, where is the speculative ATM idea that is the topic of this thread explained? In your answer, please focus on freely available sources.

[cjl]

Evidence?

[truedream]

Evidence?

I think many of you have not complete read my article,
Because of the layout design of toequest forum, it has two body’s
first half is for article body which has complete links of my article in
Contents BOX at right. Next below half is for comments and reply.

check the link given in strating thread:
First article is: basic of true final theory by true science.
• With this sub pages
• big shock
• true atom
• source of atom
• what is mass
• types of atom
• anti gravity atom
• solar system
• amf in solar system
• what is gravity
• earth
• true space
• magnet and space

Second article is: warning or warming (basic of new magnet law)
• With this sub pages
• Atom, Magnetism and space
• Gravity and magnet
• new domain for magnet
• what is magnet
• Two type of flux
• Equator area
• strong flux area
• reason for global warming
• Little loss in gravity
• gravity by its superior.