Go Back   Science Forums > Physical Sciences Forums > Astronomy and Cosmology
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 12-25-2006   #1 (permalink)
kailas_knight's Avatar
Thinking


Location:
Kerala ,India
 
kailas_knight has a spectacular aura aboutkailas_knight has a spectacular aura about
Send a message via Yahoo to kailas_knight
 



Not Ranked  0 score     
Smile modification to the split 0 concept ( original author of split 0 is durgatosh)

In "durgatosh's" article about split zero theory .....he explained how split 0 concept works....

but he mentioned 2 contradictions about that concept, to which he didn't give explanation....
i have thought about possible explanations for those 2 contradictions .....

the 2 contradictions are

(1) if
0=+X -X
then why not 2= +4 -2 and like that...

ans: the original author said that +ve and -ve things were compartmentalised
so that they wouldn't react and cancel each other out...

then why not consider that they were compartmentalised such that
all +ve matter and +ve energy and time were in one compartment

and all -ve matter(antimatter) and -ve energy and time - "in reverse direction " were in another compartment.

then we can think that "the +ve compartment represents the +ve universe and -ve compartment represents -ve universe........

+ve universe contains matter , energy and time .. -ve universe contains

anti-matter , anti-energy , time- in the reverse direction......

the things in the +ve universe has the exact opposite properties of things in the -ve universe...

the sum total of all things in the universe =0.

perhaps this statement can be rephrased as the sum total of things in the positive and negative universes =0.

ie, [+X ]+ [-X]=0
the contradiction why other magnitudes can't also seperate is irrelevant
coz, a +ve magnitude x can't split into "x+n" +ve magnitude where n=1,2,...,k and "x-n" negative magnitude ,n=1,2,....,k.

how can a +ve thing split into a +ve quantity more or less than it's own magnitude and a -ve magnitude ....

only 0 or "nothing" is so much unstable that it can't exist by itself and needs to split
into equal no of +ve and -ve things , to exist...

a magnitude other than zero is not very unstable as zero ,as any magnitude
other than 0 or nothing is "something" , so it's stable and can exist by itself without splitting....so the 1st contradiction is irrelavant...

contradiction (2) why dont we see things spontaneously splitting up?

ans: the peculiarity of "nothing" is that it's neither +ve nor -ve and infinitely unstable .so inorder to exist it has to split into n +ve and -ve things..similarly
the peculiarity of 0 is that it can represent "nothing" and it's a whole number, ie, it can represent equal amounts of both +ve and -ve things such that their sum total is nothing(0).

0 = [+ X ][- X]

the answer is that , as everthing is compartmentalized as i said above, +ve things are in +ve universe and -ve things are in -ve universe....

so +ve and -ve things in the +ve and -ve universes cant split up further....
coz , a +ve magnitude is "something".and this property also applies to -ve magnitude also.
so they are stable. and stable things can't subdivide as they can exist in the form they are in.


I remember reading about "white holes" which runs backward in time, being derived from theory of relativity.. so that should support my modifications to this theory.........

reference to white holes , alternate universe and worm holes available at this URL
http://www.zamandayolculuk.com/cetin...osenBridge.pdf


i'm looking forward to read what you have to say.... i did not intent to take credit of anyone else's work.i just added some possible modifications.i have expressed my modifications without stealing anything .....and i have specified that original split 0 concept is from durgatosh.....
hope this solves the problem of the alleged "copy threading" ...

there is also another possible explanation , which will again deviate from the original theory....

Last edited by kailas_knight; 05-28-2007 at 06:06 AM..
Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2006   #2 (permalink)
InfiniteNow's Avatar
Suspended


Location:
Austin, TX
 
InfiniteNow has a reputation beyond reputeInfiniteNow has a reputation beyond reputeInfiniteNow has a reputation beyond reputeInfiniteNow has a reputation beyond reputeInfiniteNow has a reputation beyond reputeInfiniteNow has a reputation beyond reputeInfiniteNow has a reputation beyond reputeInfiniteNow has a reputation beyond reputeInfiniteNow has a reputation beyond reputeInfiniteNow has a reputation beyond reputeInfiniteNow has a reputation beyond repute
 



Not Ranked  0 score     
Re: origin of the universe????

Wow, I've now read this text in 3 or 4 different threads. Trying to set a record or something?
Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2006   #3 (permalink)
durgatosh's Avatar
Thinking


 
durgatosh will become famous soon enoughdurgatosh will become famous soon enough
 



Not Ranked  0 score     
Re: origin of the universe????

Dear Kailas,

Don't you realize that you are duplicating the entire idea (even the scripts) which was formulated in the article I had written in the thread, "The Origin of Universe: Solving the mystery"? The concepts about the "split of zero" and "infinite instability of zero" were formulated and discussed at length in that thread.

White holes and wormholes indeed support the idea. But that does not give you the licence to take credit of somebody else's concept as yours. Yopu have done the same in your other thread." I had even warned you in a private message, but you don't seem to understand.

I write this with anguish but I believe my fellow hypographers will understand and do something to prevent such duplication. It takes much effort to formulate a concept and it pains to see somebody suddenly taking credit of one's efforts.

DP

P.S: I have written a similar message in your other thread because I want the fellow hypographers to know the truth.

DP
Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2006   #4 (permalink)
cwes99_03's Avatar
Suspended


Location:
Central Illinois
 
cwes99_03 is a jewel in the roughcwes99_03 is a jewel in the roughcwes99_03 is a jewel in the rough
 



Not Ranked  0 score     
Re: origin of the universe????

Perhaps the mods or admins need to delete the multiple threads.

Durg, are you saying that some "e-plagiarism" went on here? If so, then I believe that this thread should definitely be deleted.
Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2006   #5 (permalink)
LJP07's Avatar
Explaining


Location:
Republic of Ireland
 
LJP07 is just really niceLJP07 is just really niceLJP07 is just really niceLJP07 is just really nice
 



Not Ranked  0 score     
Re: origin of the universe????

Don't agree with E-Plaigarism.

Kailas, you should NEVER take credit for other peoples work especially after they went to the bother of doing it. You should of at least asked.

Cwes, I don't think the thread should be closed maybe just her post.

Prolu2007
Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2006   #6 (permalink)
LJP07's Avatar
Explaining


Location:
Republic of Ireland
 
LJP07 is just really niceLJP07 is just really niceLJP07 is just really niceLJP07 is just really nice
 



Not Ranked  0 score     
Re: origin of the universe????

Actually on second thought, theres only 5 posts and the thread is probably repeated, yeah, Mods please remove this thread, we don't recommend it's use anymore after E-Plaigarism and copy-threading.
Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2006   #7 (permalink)
cwes99_03's Avatar
Suspended


Location:
Central Illinois
 
cwes99_03 is a jewel in the roughcwes99_03 is a jewel in the roughcwes99_03 is a jewel in the rough
 



Not Ranked  0 score     
Re: origin of the universe????

I like that.... "COPY-THREADING"

Sounds like a cry to take up when on the warpath of keeping the forum from becoming a spam site.
Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2006   #8 (permalink)
kailas_knight's Avatar
Thinking


Location:
Kerala ,India
 
kailas_knight has a spectacular aura aboutkailas_knight has a spectacular aura about
Send a message via Yahoo to kailas_knight
 



Not Ranked  0 score     
Re: origin of the universe????

Quote:
Originally Posted by durgatosh View Post
Dear Kailas,

Don't you realize that you are duplicating the entire idea (even the scripts) which was formulated in the article I had written in the thread, "The Origin of Universe: Solving the mystery"? The concepts about the "split of zero" and "infinite instability of zero" were formulated and discussed at length in that thread.

White holes and wormholes indeed support the idea. But that does not give you the licence to take credit of somebody else's concept as yours. Yopu have done the same in your other thread." I had even warned you in a private message, but you don't seem to understand.

I write this with anguish but I believe my fellow hypographers will understand and do something to prevent such duplication. It takes much effort to formulate a concept and it pains to see somebody suddenly taking credit of one's efforts.

DP

P.S: I have written a similar message in your other thread because I want the fellow hypographers to know the truth.

DP
durgatosh,

as i said to you in my letter before ..that ,,, i have made some modifications to your theory...... i have given explanatins to support
that that theory can be true....
i admitt that this is your theory , your concept , but you haven't given expainations to make the contradictions irrelevant..... but i have given it......

and how am i supposed to post my modifications to that article without explaining the basic idea of that concept......

my fellow hypographers please note that i am not trying to
take credit of someone else's work ,but i only added more explaination to that idea,that the author of the article did not explain...

How can i present my modifications without specifying the central idea
of the concept.......

there are several things that the author of the theory didn't explain.

If anyone compares my article to durgatosh's article , he or she would know that i haven't done anything wrong.. but that i only added
extra information to that article....

i haven't finished the modifications yet , there are some more modifications to be added to make that concept perfect.....but i can't do it if you guys keep criticising me like this.......


but i can do one thing ,,, i can add a comment that the split 0 concept is really from durgatosh ,and i have modified that concept...

that would be fair enough ,wouldn't it ...that way everyone would know that
the original article is from durgatosh and the modifications are from me...
Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2006   #9 (permalink)
InfiniteNow's Avatar
Suspended


Location:
Austin, TX
 
InfiniteNow has a reputation beyond reputeInfiniteNow has a reputation beyond reputeInfiniteNow has a reputation beyond reputeInfiniteNow has a reputation beyond reputeInfiniteNow has a reputation beyond reputeInfiniteNow has a reputation beyond reputeInfiniteNow has a reputation beyond reputeInfiniteNow has a reputation beyond reputeInfiniteNow has a reputation beyond reputeInfiniteNow has a reputation beyond reputeInfiniteNow has a reputation beyond repute
 



Not Ranked  0 score     
Re: origin of the universe????

Quote:
Originally Posted by kailas_knight View Post
i only added more explaination to that idea,that the author of the article did not explain...If anyone compares my article to durgatosh's article , he or she would know that i haven't done anything wrong.. but that i only added extra information to that article....
If I retype Alice in Wonderland, but change Alice's name to Dorothy and add a scene with a kangaroo and claim that it is a story I wrote, it's still plagiarizing.

Quote:
and how am i supposed to post my modifications to that article without explaining the basic idea of that concept...... How can i present my modifications without specifying the central idea of the concept.......
Rudimentary outline: You need to use your own words, and restate with your own voice the relevant parts, then mention from where the idea orginated.
Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2006   #10 (permalink)
cwes99_03's Avatar
Suspended


Location:
Central Illinois
 
cwes99_03 is a jewel in the roughcwes99_03 is a jewel in the roughcwes99_03 is a jewel in the rough
 



Not Ranked  0 score     
Re: origin of the universe????

More rudimentary than that, you credit someone else's work and then explain your modifications to their original thoughts.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Origin of the Universe,,,,Bang or no Bang Harry Costas Astronomy and Cosmology 860 07-17-2009 07:32 AM
The Origin of Universe: Solving the mystery durgatosh Astronomy and Cosmology 292 01-26-2008 08:40 PM
Theories of the origin and evolution of the universe juicy_fruit_2005 Astronomy and Cosmology 17 11-04-2006 03:18 PM
Origin of the Universe Tomo Philosophy of Science 2 01-23-2006 04:55 PM
The Origin of GOD Kizzi Theology forum 52 07-20-2005 04:49 PM

» Advertisement
» Current Poll
Who's the sexiest man alive? Johnny Depp or Robert Pattinson?
Johnny Depp - 30.00%
3 Votes
Robert Pattinson - 0%
0 Votes
Someone else (please specify) - 40.00%
4 Votes
I'm too macho to think a guy is sexy - 30.00%
3 Votes
Total Votes: 10
You may not vote on this poll.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:32 AM.

Hypography?

Hypography [n.]: A combination of "hyperlink" and "bibliography" - ie, a list of links to electronic documents. Comparable to discography and bibliography, but not cartography.

We have been online since May 2000, and aim to be the best place to find and share science-related content of all kinds.

Share the love!

Please add more science to your life. Use our RSS feeds on your blog, your portal, or your favorite feedreader!


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.3.2
Copyright © 2000-2009 Hypography
Part of the Hypography - Science for Everyone Network