ITT, we invent a new physics from scratch that is more useful than today's physics.
The universe is naturally chaotic, human cannot pretend chaos until recently, every thing must be reframed
>>16899649Brick theory. If you stack one brick on another, the total height is 2 bricks tall.
Imagine not having your own theory that can withstand and defeat arguement and criticism...
>Energy = Mass * c^2 / Blurp>1 Blurp = your timezone from Greenwhich + 2 * your mood (from 0 to 1, bad to great) >Force = Mass * acceleration * 1.15>Stationary objects remain in place until they release a cosmic fart, the source of all movement>Two new states of matter discovered: harder than solid and lighter than gas>We are pulled downwards by Earths magnetism but we use gravity to stick things to our fridge
>>16899649The fundamental unit of energy is kindness
>>16899649This new form of physics will be based on a different set of measurements determining time, mass, gravity and several other unknown forces. I'm going to call the unknown force +, or the ting force, and define it as the potential amount of energy that can be harnessed in a human being to achieve any objective under any circumstances.
hey guys, new findings to incorporate into the updated physics. i've just released an object and it fell down. hope this helps.
i propose the Folding model. spacetime folds on itself to form spheres that exhibit the properties of every single elementary particle depending on the folding factor applied to that region in space, and the big bang is just the Big Fold where all those particles were formed by spacetime unfolding rapidly from what was originally a single giant spacetime exciton the unraveled through Ricci flow-like bubbles.
>>16899917 i love it
>>16899649Ok. How about a Disjointed Theory of Everything? Instead of trying to explain everything in terms of an ever-decreasing number of fundamental laws, you treat every kind of physical system, or even every instance of a physical system, as having its own intrinsic laws, that are to be inferred from observing it specifically. You don't even have to throw away normal physics. You just treat it like a basic prototype to help infer more customized, context-specific physical laws.
>>16899649Everything is strings
>>16899900>BlurpYou're onto it.>>16899649Energy can usually be created, We live in some ways a starry universe that is Cosmicly Evidential ofImagine turning a light beam into a lightning with another light beamThis is also evidentiary of energy can usually be created
>>16901559>Imagine turning a light beam into a lightning with another light beamPhotonic electro clean fusion energy
>4ucking counting +>minimum purchase laws
>>16901561or u could get a snorkel and take something out of the lake
>>16901564Yeeeh meteU posting over Wi Fi?Is gas related to mites?
>>16901564Check this out if You choose to with free time: https://youtu.be/7hjsROp2Kso?si=KmmDlEq06lMDj-fLSo many interesting contents
>>16901564In what scifi is there a dimensional vision pinstripe suit Man?Do You have dimensional vision?Im wondering what the Pros andor cons are, and if something doesn't add up from whatever reasons. For example, is there a conflictual dimensional that runs weapons Fairs nonchalantly andor chalantly? You know, unknown data points that make One go 'Ah.'
>>16901561
>>16899649Consider not what you can prove the mind can do objectively, rather consider what the mind is capable of experiencing of its own subjective will.Can you make a wormhole in your mind? If you could, could it be proven? But could you make an experience in your mind so real, that for your own personal experience, it was as good as a real wormhole? How far can the mind really go, when its unleashed and untethered from 'reality', which doesn't encompass what the mind can really do. And yet, if the mind *can* do something, is it not reality that is it not something occurring within reality?
>>16903245>And yet, if the mind *can* do something, is it not reality that is it not something occurring within reality?Sure, something would be occurring within reality. Maybe it could even have some of the characteristics of the actual, physical phenomenon (the subjective ones, namely). But what does it have to do with physics? You'd be dealing with a "phenomenon" in the plainest sense, confined to one specific mind with zero independence. The relevant physical phenomenon would be whatever is behind that mind activity.
Gravity precedes mass. It's a cosmic (quantum possibly) phenomenon that draws mass in by distorting space. Earth is a flat plane like, but it appears to be round because it's basically distorted into a sphere.
>>16899649Yes theory. The answer to everything is yes.>but but but...yes.
>>16901543what does this imply?
>>16903238
>>16899649Proways game of Life?PostScarcity Physics?Transcendentality?
What are insufficient aliens stealing from Global mints?Are alien Generative principles more statistically likely to send unkind aliens to hell dimensions etc? Especially on liaisons?You Know?But We Of Ongoing Gnosis Aren't Near as Likely?Can They reconcile and recuperate their mistakes of empowering satanic branes, and recompense Us Towards Adequate Transcendences and Heavenlinesses and Success Overall?Without blindsight.
>>16903881
U coppa of hatewage, handle intertimal evils that roam the Earths. Whether uniform aswell or otherwise. As punishment productively for hatewage behaviours. Floor Effect from Daniel Golemans Optimal.Am I mistaken?The nonceness of unprosperity and everungivingness shouldn't go on, at expenses of Laws Of Transcendence (Ascension Glossary . Org)Police isnt in intel nor bureau, they carried their own past positions over.Bureau doesn't mean bury AU.Sorry.Am I mistaken?Cultural Development Sciences.Proper Objectivity Factoring in Newer Sciences Results. Computed.Sorry OP, its a imageboard thread, this Thread. And I Posted 2x Free Energy.
>>16903946>Police isnt in intel nor bureau,Acronyms*
>>16899649I propose photons should be the only fundamental particles and everything else is made from them.
>>16904342seems about right
>>16904351Williamson and Van der Mark provide a nice explanation for electrons and potentially for leptons as a whole.Something similar might hold for quarks, especially considering some well known GUTs predictions on their likeness.As for W and Z bosons, we just delete them entirely. Gluons and Higgs would be exotic composites and necessarily, gravitons would also have to be (if they exist).It's all insubstantial speculation, but it's more complex than just replacing every particle in the SM with a photon.
S q u i r c l equircle
>>16903946I Wonder
>>16899649>>16904548Its several Years Old. Generated Advancedly. But there You go. OP.Even extends into mundane Solutions.Some of Which Some Get Along By
>>16904558>Its several Years Old.Approximately * Kind Of *Could Be Modelled
>>16903238...Hello?
Plants of the Concern? No Thank You. Get Real. Above Data Sci Real?
Rejoice?>>16899649Mitosising Photons?
*InterWorldBuild Sociological Alarm Sounds*
>>16904692https://youtu.be/XV3e03yfFW0?si=HkfThwywRCrinswh
>>16904548○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○