Guest c4evap Posted June 17, 2005 Share Posted June 17, 2005 Stumbled across this whilst surfing... The Vortex Theory NOTE: This is a no flame thread. :p c4 ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TetsuoShima Posted June 17, 2005 Share Posted June 17, 2005 NOTE: This is a no flame thread. :p Oh no, I'll tell you what I think of this: Moderator edit: Unappropriate comment has been removed. And that's what I think of it!! :mad: EDIT: wow, that was removed fast, it wasn't even THAT horrible? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GorunNova Posted June 17, 2005 Share Posted June 17, 2005 *tries to light a candle* Wow... it really IS a no flame thread! ^^' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest c4evap Posted June 17, 2005 Share Posted June 17, 2005 NOTE: This is a no flame thread. :p Oh no, I'll tell you what I think of this: Moderator edit: Unappropriate comment has been removed. And that's what I think of it!! :mad: EDIT: wow, that was removed fast, it wasn't even THAT horrible? If you really want/need to flame me (for whatever reason-and I can't think of why you really would want to since all I did was post a link) - send me a PM or email me. EDIT: Just trying to stay within the family friendly direction of this site. EDIT: As it turns out the "moderator" thing was a joke (damn funny). :p c4 ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weareborg Posted June 17, 2005 Share Posted June 17, 2005 Is the thoery plausable? I can't be bothered to download the PDF, i hate PDF files!!! And i haven't read the rest yet. I'll nookmark and read it later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest c4evap Posted June 17, 2005 Share Posted June 17, 2005 Is the thoery plausable? I can't be bothered to download the PDF' date=' i hate PDF files!!![/quote'] You'll have to decide that for yourself... ;) c4 B) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quosego Posted June 17, 2005 Share Posted June 17, 2005 You got me studieing, quantum mechanics einsteins relativery theori and the vortex theory. Untill now, i've got more question than answeres..... This is way to complicated.... (i should have paid more attention in mathematics) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GorunNova Posted June 17, 2005 Share Posted June 17, 2005 By PDFs, you mean those 5 PDFs listed there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TetsuoShima Posted June 17, 2005 Share Posted June 17, 2005 Okay, some (de)constructive comment: I read the entire thing, I find there is a lot of mention about things/physical phenomena not being explained properly, according to the author, but I find no mention about the Vortex theory explaining these things either. It leaves me wondering whether this is a hoax or not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest c4evap Posted June 17, 2005 Share Posted June 17, 2005 Okay' date=' some (de)constructive comment: I read the entire thing, I find there is a lot of mention about things/physical phenomena not being explained properly, according to the author, but I find no mention about the Vortex theory explaining these things either. It leaves me wondering whether this is a hoax or not?[/quote'] Ah...sweet mysteries of life... c4 ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GorunNova Posted June 17, 2005 Share Posted June 17, 2005 The data... was eaten by the vortex? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippincp Posted June 18, 2005 Share Posted June 18, 2005 A good thread for discussion for a THEORY which cannot be dismissed out of hand. I've only read the overview which cannot be taken on face value as everything is relative AS WE KNOW IT. Without an enquiring mind no steps forward would be made as is evinced by Einstien add to that the discoveries of Genes which ultimately led to DNA indentification and ultimately therapy. One can add Quantum Theory led to Quantum Mechanics which are being used today. This is what science is all about. Liken it to a walk down a main street looking for a specific thing, you ask along the way where it may be obtained. From the answers you get along the way you realise that the main street does not have what you want. You do the same on the side street and the same happens and on and on. Meanwhile someone else has been doing the same but by a different route. You both meet without having found what you want, exchange information, split up and try again not going where your oppostite no has gone as you know the answer isn't there. I could go on but suffice to say the answer will be found by building on what is already known and proved so to dismiss present known facts as untrue is the biggest red herring going. The future can only be ascertained from what we already know. I hope this is the kind of comment you wanted and I will read the pdf files when I have time and come back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coolcat13 Posted June 18, 2005 Share Posted June 18, 2005 umm wow I just dont know what to say . I tried to read through and my brain said no more school that ended 20 years ago lol plus the lighting was terriable with no torches in sight to read with Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GorunNova Posted June 18, 2005 Share Posted June 18, 2005 Theories don't typically become obsolete... often they become subsets of newer theories. For instance, even thought we've gotten to Relativity and even beyond, for the most part Newtonian physics is still widely used, because it still does the job in most standard cases (i.e. when you're not travelling really, really fast, or dealing with really, really small particles) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beawulf Posted June 18, 2005 Share Posted June 18, 2005 Dont bother reading the text on the site, it doesnt discuss the theory at all, only read the pdf files. One of the reviewers says that his finding agree with einstiens theory of relativity, rather than make it obsolete like the site said. Essentially he is saying that protons exist in three dimensional space but protrude into four dimensional space, and electrons exist in four dimensional space protruding into three dimensional space, and gravity is the result of 2 curls in space that exist between the particals. He also says that energy photons exists in solid, liquid and gas states The concepts are all a bit beyond me so I cant really comment. It seems strange though that an american scientist hasnt got any peers locally to review his work, I wonder if his references has been fabricated thinking people generally might not check with Russia. I'd be interested in hearing Prof Hawking's take on these theories. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maverick Posted June 24, 2005 Share Posted June 24, 2005 i tried doing a search in science nature and sciencedirect - elsevier, and found no direct references but i do not understand enough to go looking for it in detail. the fact that the guy who worked on this theory is american and unsupported by the americans says something to me but i like the theory. when i was a real stoner a few years ago someone told me that travelling at the speed of light distorts time, so i came up with a theory. "like wow dude, that means........(long pause to gather thoughts).......like if the big bang occurred and ther explosion threw particles out form that bang at speeds greater than light then we all exist for only a split second as we would really perceive time before the universe collapsed back in on itself, and we could like do it in a vw campervan with like flames down the side" whew, i dont do drugs since i started workin with youngsters.......good call dude Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GorunNova Posted June 24, 2005 Share Posted June 24, 2005 Essentially he is saying that protons exist in three dimensional space but protrude into four dimensional space' date=' and electrons exist in four dimensional space protruding into three dimensional space, and gravity is the result of 2 curls in space that exist between the particals. [/quote'] I'm kind of interested in how they think that anything in this universe can do anything but express themselves totally in all available dimensions... do they explain that? I'll read through the PDFs soon... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beawulf Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 they dont really go into much detail at all, you have to buy the book for details... not a very scientific approach if you ask me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carcynsdad Posted August 6, 2005 Share Posted August 6, 2005 sounds like a hoax, but i wont be buying the book to find out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
svendopel Posted September 1, 2005 Share Posted September 1, 2005 Was really interested in this until he started on god and the bible. The bible is a book with 70 chapters missing and JC was a man as was Buddha and most religious icons. Science is pure and leaves no room for such nonesense. In America they still teach adam and eve instead of evolution how backward is that. :rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now