Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 35

Thread: Cosmology with a perfect Occam's razor.

  1. #1

    Cosmology with a perfect Occam's razor.

    This is cosmology using infinites and I explain it with a perfect Occam's razor. Meaning I make zero assumptions as I begin with nothing and the infinites come from this and from the infinites come the particles and atoms and chemistry and stars and galaxies. Everything is explained in a logical deduction beginning with nothing. And in this cosmology are only three dimensions.

    When you have nothing there are no borders or blockages. This causes that there is infinite size. The infinite small and the infinite large. There is nothing holding anything back in nothing. The infinite small is actually nothing and the infinite large is something that is infinite detailed. It wants to become everything without a limit. The infinite details of an infinite large forms into a perfect sphere with no flatness no matter how small you think of it. It is infinite after all. If you have something that is infinite large with infinite details it will always form a perfect sphere and it cannot shape up into anything else unless you have a better suggestion. It wouldn't be infinite details if there was flatness on the sphere. This is what an infinite like the infinite large will do. When you have your perfect sphere you have a particle. The particle wants to expand with infinite strength as it wants to be infinite large.

    Right next to an infinite large particle another infinite large particle will be formed as there is no border and this fills heaven with infinite particles as there is no border or blockage. Think of the infinite large particle as a thing and that heaven is filled with infinite of these particles. All particles of heaven formed at once and they remain forever as there is nothing removing them from heaven. Because they exist always no more new particles are formed and there already is an infinite as never ending. And because they all exist already there is room between their surface areas where their spheres do not touch. This is nothing and the infinite small thus the opposite of the infinite large. And when you have the infinite small you have to have its opposite the infinite large otherwise the infinite small would be a finite and the other way around too.

    Space is filled with these particles that all press upon each other with infinite strength and thus they press with equal strength upon each other which creates a balance. So nothing will expand or shrink just like that it takes something more. Because space is filled with perfect spheres that have no flatness on their surface and they press upon each other with infinite strength they all spin because there is no stable flatness on their surface. And they all spin in the direction of least resistance. And they all have multiple perfect spheres pressing upon them so they spin and this causes them to travel in space. Because they all are roughly equal in size their travel path is chaotic and they also skid across each other their surfaces with the force of least resistance. Space fabric moves chaotic. Because there is friction between skidding particles room opens up in space fabric even though they all try to expand with an infinite strength. It's like rolling two balls into each other this will keep them rolling neatly together but when you roll two balls up against each other they want to cast away from each other. This casting away opens up room. And because they all want to expand the open room allows a particle to expand larger than the average particle. This happens everywhere in space fabric. Some will enlarge while others shrink. Because too much friction will apply pressure and this also allows a particle to shrink. For every particle that enlarges another becomes smaller and now you have a difference in space fabric. Space is intact because particles always press upon each other. It cannot drift apart.
    The smallest form of a particle is a gravity particle and when it enlarges a bit it becomes warmth. The larger particles become in succession the different they will behave around an atom. Warmth its smallest form is a radio particle then comes the micro particle then infrared. When warmth becomes larger it is a light particle with its smallest form being red light then come yellow light and its largest is blue light. Even larger is radiation which is made of ultra violet and gamma rays and cosmic rays. Even larger is the electron. And then come the particles that make up atoms I named them man particles because I wanted to give it a human aspect. And larger than man particles are woman particles and they can potentially become very large compared to gravity.

    Because space fabric always has openings occurring because the particles travel and skid across each their surfaces there is warmth in heaven so there is always a radio background noise. The warmth particles are larger than gravity and because of this infrared warmth will have a straight travel path in Heaven. Infrared has become so large compared to gravity particles that it has tiny gravity particles spinning back and forth on the surface of each side of the infrared particle. This causes a side with the strongest pull in the direction of least resistance and a side with a weaker pull in the direction of least resistance. This causes infrared to move in a straight travel path. I call it the force and drag sides of a particle. The smaller warmth becomes the more its travel path will begin curbing up instead of going into a straight pathway. Light will travel in a straight pathway too and so do the larger particles. Because space is filled with infrared and their straight travel path as well as gravity and its chaotic curbed travel path space fabric will begin to whirl. Space fabric is maneuvering between the straight travel path of infrared and the curbed chaotic travel path of gravity. This causes a whirl in space fabric across very large places in space. Inside this whirl space fabric curb travels in mass numbers of particles because of this. And when you have curbing room opens up. In this open room particles expand from gravity all the way to man particles.

    The man particles because they are so large compared to a gravity particles will have gravity particles travel across its curbed surface always as space never stops maneuvering. This causes small openings to open up between the gravity particles that maneuver across the curbed surface of a large man particle. When these openings occur gravity particles are pushed into these openings because space fabric is always under pressure from all expanding particles. Thus there is a flowing attraction of gravity particles towards the openings on the surface of a man particle. This allows man particles to stick together while they keep spinning. When you have several man particles sticking together by flow attraction of gravity particles you get an atom nucleus. As the space fabric is whirling where there is warmth atoms thus form in the curbed travel of space fabric. In the center of such a space fabric whirl a galaxy forms by the atoms that are created. You can think of the spiral arms of a galaxy as the spirals of a whirl.

    Electrons are a bit smaller than man particles and there for do not have enough flow attraction to form into an atom but they can stick closely to an atom without becoming stuck on the surface. So electrons are around an atom nucleus. The electrons will rotate around the atom nucleus its surface. The electrons spin around the atom nucleus and in a curbed pathway in space fabric and this causes for the electrons to create small openings for particles to expand into. This is why atoms radiate a bit as gravity particles turn into warmth particles thus radio particles. When you over charged atoms like in a light bulb its copper wire with electrons much more room opens up and this allows for gravity to enlarge and emit as warmth and light from a light bulb though it's mostly the small gas atoms that become over charged by electrons in a light bulb. The smaller the atom the steeper the curb is the electrons make around it so a small gas atom has more chance at opening up room when over charged by electrons. The same happens when you over charge an antenna emitter with electrons. It will create warmth particles or radio particles. And because the radio particles are near gravity in their size they curb up in their pathway as they travel. This causes that a radio wave emits in radius because millions of radio particles are emitting in all directions at once as they curb up in their travel path. When a radio particle enlarges it becomes infrared and infrared has a force and a drag side to its particle because it's much larger than gravity particles it will have gravity particles spin back and forth on both sides of the infrared particle. This causes that the infrared particle and larger particles do not curb up in their travel path but go in a straight direction. Now electrons have much flow attraction and this allows them to curb each their travel path when in large numbers so that's how an electric magnetic field forms.
    Atoms are made of roughly equal sized man particles otherwise they aren't stable. But some atoms are made of large man particles and other atoms are made of small man particles. And this makes it so that atoms have different sizes to them. And there are two stable forms of atoms and any atoms that is unstable turns into an acid as it will spin in space fabric and cause for warmth to be created. I explain how chemistry works in my free book.

    Because atoms are made of spinning man particles they can behave liquid. If you would have atoms that do not have spinning particles they would behave as powder and the earth its oceans and atmosphere would be as powder instead of behaving fluidly. When you press your hand on the surface of the water the spinning of the man particles of the water molecules makes them push away so you can stick your hand into the water. However when atoms bond together and form something like a sand crystal it will no longer behave fluidly as now it's a chunk of atoms.

    This is the basics of the cosmology using infinites and a perfect Occam's razor. Science has overlooked this possibility but it's all fully possible and logical. I call it Nature of Heaven.

    <redacted>

    I hope you enjoyed my cosmology.
    Last edited by Swift; 2018-Jun-19 at 12:44 PM. Reason: redacted book promotion

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    The beautiful north coast (Ohio)
    Posts
    47,408
    Sebas

    First, welcome to CQ.

    Second, after some discussion among the Moderation Team, we have decided to redact your next to last paragraph. We saw this as mostly a promotion of your book, and such self-promotion is against our rules (please see rule 6,
    there is a link to all the rules in my signature).

    I also suggest, if you have not done so already, that you review the other rules, particularly Rule 13 and the links within, about the Against The Mainstream (ATM) section of the forum.

    Have fun.
    At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

    All moderation in purple - The rules

  3. #3
    I understand. Though it's all free but I understand. It's still good to share the info though. And below here I have something that didn't fit in the post.

    Another example is if you see the sun rise or you see it lower in the atmosphere of earth it will look red and emit red light. This is because the warmth particles emitting from the sun are having some friction in earth its atmosphere and this causes them to enlarge a bit to the smallest light form which is red. Now if the sun would be completely above you like at twelve P.M. then there is much lesser atmosphere between your view point and the sun so now you will not see the red glow as the warmth isn't getting enough friction from the thinner atmosphere. But the moon will not glow red when it rises or goes down because it doesn't emit the warmth the sun does. Though the earth its atmosphere is sometimes between the moon and the sun giving the moon a red glow as in blood moon.

    There actually is a test that can be done through this cosmology that will proof it correct. It's based on influencing the infinites of heaven upon ice crystals. Ice crystals are very flexible in their growth but they all use the infinite small to create their reoccurring shapes. The infinite small is what the infinite large particles want to push into and this creates patterns in particles. A particle actually has an infinite particles within like heaven has an infinite particles within. You can extrapolate this endlessly as there is no border in nothing. And because there are infinite particles inside a particle they leave a pull pattern where heavenly particles want to push into. As they want to push into nothing. Now an ice crystal uses its infinite small pull pattern to recreate its own shape as it grows. The large six angled ice crystal on the north pole of Saturn did this too. Ice crystals have six edges always and this is because of the pull pattern coming from the infinite small. But you can influence this pull pattern by spinning crystals near ice formation and this will change the shape the ice crystals grow into. And there is no other cosmology that explains this phenomena but I know it's true by logic and it can be tested by scientists.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    8,961
    Quote Originally Posted by Sebas View Post
    Another example is if you see the sun rise or you see it lower in the atmosphere of earth it will look red and emit red light. This is because the warmth particles emitting from the sun are having some friction in earth its atmosphere and this causes them to enlarge a bit to the smallest light form which is red. Now if the sun would be completely above you like at twelve P.M. then there is much lesser atmosphere between your view point and the sun so now you will not see the red glow as the warmth isn't getting enough friction from the thinner atmosphere. But the moon will not glow red when it rises or goes down because it doesn't emit the warmth the sun does. Though the earth its atmosphere is sometimes between the moon and the sun giving the moon a red glow as in blood moon.
    Wow,to use Pauli's quote: "That's not even wrong"!
    All comments made in red are moderator comments. Please, read the rules of the forum here and read the additional rules for ATM, and for conspiracy theories. If you think a post is inappropriate, don't comment on it in thread but report it using the /!\ button in the lower left corner of each message. But most of all, have fun!

    Catch me on twitter: @tusenfem
    Catch Rosetta Plasma Consortium on twitter: @Rosetta_RPC

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1,681
    Quote Originally Posted by Sebas View Post
    Another example is if you see the sun rise or you see it lower in the atmosphere of earth it will look red and emit red light.
    By "it" do you mean "the sun" or "the atmosphere of the earth"? If the former, the sun is always emitting red light. If the latter, no. The atmosphere scatters blue light, letting red come through. Look up "Rayleigh scattering". If the sun were not emitting red light, you would not see a reddish sunset. The atmosphere does not create colours; it can only filter/scatter light that is already there.

    This is because the warmth particles emitting from the sun are having some friction in earth its atmosphere and this causes them to enlarge a bit to the smallest light form which is red.
    There are no "warmth particles." At one time, heat was thought to be a substance (look up the terms "caloric" and "phlogiston"). We have moved beyond that level of ignorance. Will you next tell us how many teeth a horse should have, based on your ideas?

    Now if the sun would be completely above you like at twelve P.M. then there is much lesser atmosphere between your view point and the sun so now you will not see the red glow as the warmth isn't getting enough friction from the thinner atmosphere.
    Again, see "Rayleigh scattering". Your "theory", such as it is, cannot reproduce the quantitatively verified predictions of Rayleigh. Among these are the proportionality of scattering to the inverse fourth power of wavelength.

    But the moon will not glow red when it rises or goes down because it doesn't emit the warmth the sun does. Though the earth its atmosphere is sometimes between the moon and the sun giving the moon a red glow as in blood moon.
    Moonlight indeed reddens at moonset, just as sunlight does at sunset. See, for example, https://www.atoptics.co.uk/atoptics/issmoon.htm (found with a few seconds of googling).

    In your quest to inductively create our universe from a few simple axioms, you have left out the most important part of the scientific method, which is then to test whether your theory matches reality. Hint: It does not even come close, sorry.

    I would suggest first undertaking a study of real science. The investment in time would be well worth it. It would certainly save you from wasting time making up the fairy tales you have presented here. Only after understanding mainstream scientific theory can you hope to overturn it. Without an understanding of the epistemological landscape, you will fail. It is too easy to make up a "just-so" story that feels right if you are ignorant of how things work. The more you learn, the more you will appreciate the constraints one must apply to thinking. If you want to "think outside of the box" you need to know where the box is, and why its dimensions are what they are.
    Last edited by Geo Kaplan; 2018-Jun-19 at 08:36 PM.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Central Virginia
    Posts
    1,575
    I've seen many a sunrise and sunset too bright to look at directly, esp when driving into one. Had always figured that the different hues were due to the tenuous cloud cover and/or atmospheric pollution and planetary outgassing converging that very moment. When a cold front from the north (here) sweeps the air clean (esp in winter) the sunsets aren't that great....but the night time skies can be spectacular.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Wellington, New Zealand
    Posts
    3,807
    Quote Originally Posted by Sebas View Post
    This is cosmology using infinites and I explain it with a perfect Occam's razor. Meaning I make zero assumptions as I begin with nothing ...
    The major problem is this is not Occam's razor which is that when we have two equivalent competing ideas, the one that postulates the few entities should be preferred. It is not a method to create an idea.
    The next problem with the misuse of Occam's razor is the "equivalent competing" requirement . You have no equivalent to mainstream cosmology because you have no math. Your idea does not compete against mainstream cosmology because of the lack of predictions.

    See the other posts about the incorrect physics n your ATM idea.

    Your "cosmology and ice crystals" section shows how invalid your idea is. If you had a valid ATM idea you would be able to say how it would make ice crystals different. Instead we get a vague assertion of some kind of change from a hexagon. How do you know that your idea will have any effect on ice crystals at all?

    There is no "large six angled ice crystal on the north pole of Saturn". Ice crystals commonly have six sides because of the shape of chemical bonds. Saturn's hexagon is a weather pattern probably caused by a gradient in wind speeds.
    Last edited by Reality Check; 2018-Jun-19 at 10:12 PM.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    2,973
    I'd be curious to know how "an infinite large particle" can be found next to another "infinite large particle". Does the concept of "next to" not imply a boundary, which in turn implies finite-ness in at least one dimension?

    Similarly, you argue that something that is infinitely large forms a "perfect sphere". How does something that is infinite have a shape (which by definition is defined by its boundary/ies)? For example, I'm curious as to what the difference would be between (say) an infinite sphere and an infinite pyramid? Or an infinite cube? Or an infinite dodecahedron?
    Last edited by AGN Fuel; 2018-Jun-20 at 04:35 AM.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    533
    Quote Originally Posted by Sebas View Post
    The smallest form of a particle is a gravity particle and when it enlarges a bit it becomes warmth....
    ...The man particles because they are so large compared to a gravity particles will have gravity particles travel across its curbed surface always as space never stops maneuvering. This causes small openings to open up between the gravity particles that maneuver across the curbed surface of a large man particle. When these openings occur gravity particles are pushed into these openings because space fabric is always under pressure from all expanding particles. Thus there is a flowing attraction of gravity particles towards the openings on the surface of a man particle. This allows man particles to stick together while they keep spinning. When you have several man particles sticking together by flow attraction of gravity particles you get an atom nucleus....I hope you enjoyed my cosmology.
    Sorry Sebas, but probably the worst ATM idea in years,

    No maths or physics.
    Over 1800 words of waffle saying almost nothing.
    Hard to read, poorly set out.

    Good imagination maybe, but you are not going to convince anyone, on this kind of forum, that it's a good idea.

    ...P.S. Come to think of it, maybe you'd make a good politician!
    Last edited by john hunter; 2018-Jun-20 at 07:53 AM.
    "...when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth." Sherlock Holmes

  10. #10
    I see there is no confincing mathematicians but the logic is very real. And Occam's razor is based on the lessest assumptions which I make. No matter if you don't want to compare my logic to mathematics. Let me tell you people something about mathematics. There is no sign for infinite and thats why it cannot do it. Using mathematics you cannot understand how heaven works because it doesn't do infinite. Now heaven is infinite because if there would be a border to size then show me one and show me there is nothing behind it. Simple logic and that is how heaven is made. Not by over complicated mathematics that have nothing to do with reality. Look around you. Everything is a shape. And thats how explain it too. But insisnt on saying my theory has nothing to do with reality while continuing support for mathematics which cannot do infinite. And yes there are no boundaries in heaven so there will always form a particle next to a particle. The particle is infinite in detail so its an infinite large. That does not imply you cannot have anything besides it if there is no border to size. If you are going to explain heaven by a logical deduction you have to start at the logical deduction its root and that is that heaven has infinite size. Otherwise your theory is flawed. But mathematical theories don't begin with infinite mathematics can only do finite. As its made of numbers which are units and thus finites. If there was an infinite to mathematics or calculations then show me the last digit in the row and claim it to be the infinite. Logical deduction takes you from an infinite heaven with no borders as it comes from nothing and into the particles. And not by making up random particles and then try and fit heaven around it in a theory. That isn't logical deduction. My logical method of explaining heaven deserves just as much credit as any mathematical model because mathematics cannot do infinites.

  11. #11
    The ice crystal test should make the ice crystal shape up into the spinning crystal. I think I wrote that. But it can also become influenced by the infinite fast and that would give it longer spikes. I do know what it should do its just that the test hasn't been done yet. The mathematicians never thought of doing this test because they don't know the proper cosmology but there is a whole field of science in manipulating particles using hole patterns that is left untouched. I am not allowed to show you my whole work on it so I won't go into further details about the hole that is besides particles of perfect spheres.

  12. #12
    As far as predictions go I explain it by predicting what particles do. And you cannot do this perfect not even using mathematics because particles have infinite little differences in their sizes. Not even a calculated model of heaven would be able to do it exactly how it works so my method of explaining is just as valid as a mathematical prediction.

  13. #13
    Oh and the reason why I explained the red sun glow is because I have a simpler explanation than today's science has. Of course the sun shines all colors and the earth atmosphere its argon makes the sky blue. But my explanation is simpler for why the sun rise will glow red.

  14. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
    There is no "large six angled ice crystal on the north pole of Saturn". Ice crystals commonly have six sides because of the shape of chemical bonds. Saturn's hexagon is a weather pattern probably caused by a gradient in wind speeds.
    You say its a weather pattern but thats a difference of opinion. Can you proof its weather phenomena? It's an ice crystal as they shape up that way. There is still a weather pattern above it though.

  15. #15
    Here you can find an image of an ice crystal. https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qim...c29965af8f0f-c It looks exactly the same as the ice crystal ontop of Saturn. Though there is some vortex stuff going on above it.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    The beautiful north coast (Ohio)
    Posts
    47,408
    Quote Originally Posted by john hunter View Post
    Sorry Sebas, but probably the worst ATM idea in years,

    No maths or physics.
    Over 1800 words of waffle saying almost nothing.
    Hard to read, poorly set out.

    Good imagination maybe, but you are not going to convince anyone, on this kind of forum, that it's a good idea.

    ...P.S. Come to think of it, maybe you'd make a good politician!
    Ask the OP questions, attack the idea, but do not attack the person. You are getting very close to crossing that line. Watch it.
    At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

    All moderation in purple - The rules

  17. #17
    And I will explain the perfect sphere again. If you have an infinite details you will always get a perfect sphere. Think of the details having to have a spot even if there is an infinite of them and if you create flatness then there will be a lack of details where its flat. The flatness has no details where it should have curbed. So an infinite large particle will shape up into a perfect sphere.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    4,660

    The Honeybee Egg Cell On Saturn

    Quote Originally Posted by Sebas View Post
    Here you can find an image of an ice crystal. https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qim...c29965af8f0f-c It looks exactly the same as the ice crystal ontop of Saturn. Though there is some vortex stuff going on above it.
    It is not our duty to explain the mainstream to you. It is your obligation to know and understand the mainstream before you try to change it.

    That said, I will now do your homework for you. The explanation for the hexagon is here:

    https://aasnova.org/2015/08/21/an-ex...turns-hexagon/

    Note first that the hex is made of clouds. It is not solid. Second, the clouds move at different rates.

    Simply asserting that it looks like an ice crystal so it must be one is not sufficient. For the same reason, it is not a honeybee egg cell.

    Also, you need to define what you mean by 'infintite details'.

    edit: Motion link is here:

    https://www.google.com/search?q=satu...NpMwbjL-gjv2M:
    Last edited by John Mendenhall; 2018-Jun-20 at 04:00 PM. Reason: add link
    I'm not a hardnosed mainstreamer; I just like the observations, theories, predictions, and results to match.

    "Mainstream isnít a faith system. It is a verified body of work that must be taken into account if you wish to add to that body of work, or if you want to change the conclusions of that body of work." - korjik

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1,681
    Quote Originally Posted by Sebas View Post
    Oh and the reason why I explained the red sun glow is because I have a simpler explanation than today's science has. Of course the sun shines all colors and the earth atmosphere its argon makes the sky blue. But my explanation is simpler for why the sun rise will glow red.
    You're making an extremely serious error. You are labouring under the misapprehension that merely being simpler makes it right. That's not what Occam's razor says at all. You have elevated a misreading of Occam's razor to the level of dogma. That's silly. To paraphrase Einstein, use the simplest explanation that works, but no simpler. Yours is certainly simple, but it does not work.

    Just because an explanation feels good to you, and is simple, does not make it right. As I mentioned -- and you continue to ignore -- a scientific theory must be in accord with observation. I've already told you that your colour theory does not work. Your refutation is a mere restatement that you are right. That does not fly here. Your job is to show that you are right, not simply to assert it.

    Since you aren't understanding what you have to do here, here's a direct request: Show, using appropriate mathematics, that your theory can reproduce the experimentally verified result that light scatters according to the inverse fourth power of wavelength.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Wellington, New Zealand
    Posts
    3,807
    Quote Originally Posted by Sebas View Post
    I see there is no confincing mathematicians but the logic is very real. And Occam's razor is based on the lessest assumptions which I make.
    You are still in error about Occam's razor which is not that any theories are constructed by starting from nothing or that any theory with "lessest assumptions" is right.
    Occam's razor (also Ockham's razor or Ocham's razor; Latin: lex parsimoniae "law of parsimony") is the problem-solving principle that, when presented with competing hypothetical answers to a problem, one should select the answer that makes the fewest assumptions.
    The razor starts with competing answers (plural and existing) to a problem. It is a way to determine which existing answer is preferred, not which answer is correct. The word "compete" means the answers have to solve the problem equally. Your idea does not compete. I will illustrate this with a formal question:
    IF01: What is the match of your ATM idea to Hubble's law?
    Standard cosmology has had an answer to this for about 90 years.

    Infinity has can be negative or positive and so has a sign.

    Heaven is religion, not science and especially not cosmology. So all the heaven stuff is irrelevant.

    Mathematics has been "doing infinites" for centuries (first accounts from 490–430 BC with Zeno's paradoxes!). Cosmology allows the universe to be infinite or finite.
    Last edited by Reality Check; 2018-Jun-20 at 10:57 PM.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Wellington, New Zealand
    Posts
    3,807
    Quote Originally Posted by Sebas View Post
    Here you can find an image of an ice crystal. https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qim...c29965af8f0f-c It looks exactly the same as the ice crystal ontop of Saturn. Though there is some vortex stuff going on above it.
    You have repeated an error so:
    IF02: Please answer that you know that Saturn's hexagon is weather, not an ice crystal.
    Saturn's hexagon is a persisting hexagonal cloud pattern around the north pole of Saturn, located at about 78įN.[1][2][3]
    The ice crystal image comparison is still wrong.
    Saturn's hexagon is clouds in Saturn's atmosphere. An ice crystal is a solid object, e.g. in Earth's atmosphere.
    Saturn's hexagon is clouds and gas laws. An ice crystal is a seed (e.g. a dust grain) which seems to be in your image + water and essentially chemistry.
    A feature of Saturn's hexagon is that it has a swirling interior. An ice crystal does not have its interior swirling around.
    A feature of Saturn's hexagon is that it changes its color. An ice crystal does not change its color.
    A feature of Saturn's hexagon is that it has rounded corners. An ice crystal has sharp corners.
    A feature of Saturn's hexagon is that it has a circular center. An ice crystal has a six sided interior.
    Last edited by Reality Check; 2018-Jun-20 at 11:14 PM.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Wellington, New Zealand
    Posts
    3,807
    Quote Originally Posted by Sebas View Post
    The ice crystal test ....
    So far there is no ice crystal test. A test in science has a meaning. A theory makes a prediction that can be tested and can be falsified. A specification of an experiment is made that is detailed enough to actually do the test. This covers two fundamental parts of science. A theory that cannot make predictions is useless. A theory that makes predictions that cannot be currently tested is fairly useless (maybe someone sometime can construct an experiment to test the prediction but maybe not).

    IF03a: Please state exactly what changes in an ice crystal are predicted by your ATM idea, Sebas.
    IF03b: Please specify the experiment that will detect those predicted changes in an ice crystal, Sebas.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Wellington, New Zealand
    Posts
    3,807
    Quote Originally Posted by Sebas View Post
    If you have an infinite details you will always get a perfect sphere. ....
    Counter examples easily debunk that statement, Sebas.
    The Mandelbrot set has "infinite details" but we do not always get any circle. A 3d Mandelbrot set will not be a sphere.
    An ellipsoid has infinite details and is not a sphere.
    A cube has infinite details and is not a sphere.
    etc. etc.

    Alternately you have a personal, unstated definition of "infinite details" that is "the set of points equally distant from a point", i.e. the definition of a sphere!

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    2,931
    Quote Originally Posted by Sebas View Post
    Here you can find an image of an ice crystal. https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qim...c29965af8f0f-c It looks exactly the same as the ice crystal ontop of Saturn.
    It looks as much like a cell in a beehive as it does an ice crystal.

    Superficial similarities do not indicate underlying causes.

    Here is a simple sine wave - much like the undulating jetstream in the Earth's atmo (i.e same cause) - translated into polar coordinates. This took me 5 minutes.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	polar-sine-wave.png 
Views:	22 
Size:	31.9 KB 
ID:	23410
    Last edited by DaveC426913; 2018-Jun-21 at 12:33 AM.

  25. #25
    Haha the hexagon is made of clouds? You people do realize that you are not being honest here. Clouds will never form a hexagon. And even someone said crystals have to do with the way chemistry forms. Yet clouds are not solid chemistry. Have you ever looked at sand crystals? They will shape up in the same pattern but at different sizes. Just like the ice crystal on the north pole of Saturn. Its a big ice crystal and there is no weather pattern that will ever cause a hexagon. And I will be honest with you people. There are thinkers and there are learners. The learners go to math class and think they are prestigous yet they aren't even as smart as a construction worker that can build things. They just copy each other with their learning capacity and nod yes to the highest idol without thinking it through. I explained the basics of Heaven perfectly well and if you need to insist that it isn't allowed to be called heaven as that would be religion then you're wasting time. But you people cannot see through simple logic and try and say that simple isn't the best reason yet it always is and you will never be able to bypass the simplisity of my argument. Its too bad I am not allowed to show you the whole cosmology on this forum so you got me at a serious disadvantage because forum rules make even a free book of 90 pages which I'll never all place on this forum look like its merchandise. So I cannot teach you the full reality of heaven. I explain chemistry exactly and how stars form and how they work. I explain the difference between bendable atoms and crystalized atoms. I explain why a warm weather fron rotates clockwise on the northern half of the world and counter clockwise when its a cold weather front. And why it does this in reverse on the southern half of the planet. I explain why the moon doesn't rotate and have a megnetic field. I explain a science based on hole patterns that they have never touched and do not understand. But ah well my disadvantage remains and all I get is talk about the ice crystal on top of Saturn which really is an ice crystal even if there is some atmospheric weather above it. The satellite casinni first had to discove it by taking infrared pictures BECAUSE ITS AN ICE CRYSTAL. Only once it got closer could it take light images.

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1,681
    Quote Originally Posted by Sebas View Post
    Its too bad I am not allowed to show you the whole cosmology on this forum
    No one has asked to see your whole cosmology. I would, however, like to see you answer my specific question about light scattering. When might I expect you to provide one?

    Remember, the challenge here is for you to convince us that you are right. It is not our responsibility to convince you of basic science.

    If your theory can reproduce the known inverse fourth-power scattering law, then please show it. If your theory can't, then it is inferior to mainstream theory. According to Occam, we would then choose the latter. Correctness takes precedence over simplicity. It's simpler to imagine that evil spirits cause brain tumors. Who do you want to treat it? A witch doctor or neurosurgeon?

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Wellington, New Zealand
    Posts
    3,807
    Quote Originally Posted by Sebas View Post
    Haha the hexagon is made of clouds? ...
    Are you answering?
    IF02: Please answer that you know that Saturn's hexagon is weather, not an ice crystal.
    Then this post is very ignorant about Saturn's hexagon which is the observation of clouds in Saturn's atmosphere forming a hexagon.

    Quote Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
    Saturn's hexagon is clouds in Saturn's atmosphere. An ice crystal is a solid object, e.g. in Earth's atmosphere.
    Saturn's hexagon is clouds and gas laws. An ice crystal is a seed (e.g. a dust grain) which seems to be in your image + water and essentially chemistry.
    A feature of Saturn's hexagon is that it has a swirling interior. An ice crystal does not have its interior swirling around.
    A feature of Saturn's hexagon is that it changes its color. An ice crystal does not change its color.
    A feature of Saturn's hexagon is that it has rounded corners. An ice crystal has sharp corners.
    A feature of Saturn's hexagon is that it has a circular center. An ice crystal has a six sided interior.
    IF04a: Give your evidence that ice crystals have a swirling interior as in Saturn's hexagon, Sebas.
    IF04b: Give your evidence that ice crystals change color as in Saturn's hexagon, Sebas.
    IF04c: Give your evidence that ice crystals have round corners as in Saturn's hexagon, Sebas.
    IF04d: Give your evidence that ice crystals have circular centers as in Saturn's hexagon, Sebas.

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Wellington, New Zealand
    Posts
    3,807
    Quote Originally Posted by Sebas View Post
    And even someone said crystals have to do with the way chemistry forms.
    I stated the science that ice crystals are usually six sided because of chemistry. To be more exact because the angles of chemical bonds bend to minimize energy and for ice that gives 6 sides. Snowflakes have six sides.

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Wellington, New Zealand
    Posts
    3,807
    Quote Originally Posted by Sebas View Post
    Have you ever looked at sand crystals? They will shape up in the same pattern but at different sizes.
    Sand crystals have many sometimes irregular "patterns" because they are made of many different materials. Read Sand and the "Close-up (1◊1 cm) of sand from the Gobi Desert, Mongolia." image. Do a google for sand crystal images. What you get right is crystals have the same shape at different sizes. That is part of the definition of a crystal. There are cubic crystals. There are spiky crystals. There are hexagonal prism crystals.
    Crystal shape
    Last edited by Reality Check; 2018-Jun-22 at 02:19 AM.

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Wellington, New Zealand
    Posts
    3,807
    Quote Originally Posted by Sebas View Post
    ...BECAUSE ITS AN ICE CRYSTAL.
    That emphasizes that you really have to learn about Saturn and its hexagon.
    Saturn is a gas planet with an average radius of 58,232 km (about nine times that of Earth). The sides of the hexagonal cloud pattern are 13,800 km long!
    The atmosphere of Saturn consists of 96.3% molecular hydrogen and 3.25% helium by volume with traces of ammonia, acetylene, ethane, propane, phosphine and methane. Saturn has upper cloud layers made of ammonia crystals (FYI these have cubic symmetry). Saturn has lower cloud layers that "appear to consist of either ammonium hydrosulfide (NH4SH) or water". There is probably not enough water on Saturn for your physically impossible water ice crystal with sides that are 13,800 km long.

    The hexagon was first discovered by Voyager in 1981. Cassini-Huygens gave us more detailed images over a time period that for example shows the clouds swirling inside the hexagon and the hexagon changing color.

    Voyager took visible light images of the hexagon. Cassini has taken thermal infrared images and visible light images of the hexagon. Saturn's Mysterious Hexagon Emerges From Winter Darkness
    The visible-light cameras of Cassini’s imaging science subsystem, which have higher resolution than the infrared instruments and the Voyager cameras, got their long-awaited glimpse of the hexagon in January, as the planet approached equinox. Imaging team scientists calibrated and stitched together 55 images to create a mosaic and three-frame movie. The mosaics do not show the region directly around the north pole because it had not yet fully emerged from winter night at that time.
    Amateur astronomers have taken visible light images of the hexagon (Saturn's Hexagon Viewed from the Ground).

    The reason that the first Cassini images were in the infrared was that it was dark! The hexagon was on the night side of Saturn. There was no sunlight illuminating it.

    There is a scientific explanation for the hexagon backed up experiments: "Similar regular shapes were created in the laboratory when a circular tank of liquid was rotated at different speeds at its centre and periphery"
    Last edited by Reality Check; 2018-Jun-22 at 02:49 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •