🎧 Headphones Recommended for Better experience. Do share your thoughts about the video 🌌

Great video !! appreciate the work

You deserve more subs

I would say that the paradox of symmetry is not flawed rather it's incomplete the way we look at it. Yes, there is an imbalance between matter and anti-matter but when we get to understand the big picture when we assume it to be time-symmetric, i.e., the counterbalance to the amount of matter at present may be generated in the past or in the future. As the thermodynamic arrow of time of the universe moves towards the direction of increasing entropy it is likely that the amount of antimatter generated in the future would balance the amount of excess matter at present. This cycle goes on and on. My views are totally based on my outlook toward physics and my imagination. I may be totally wrong.

@nickcooper889

11 ай бұрын

Your response demonstrates an interesting perspective on the paradox of symmetry and the imbalance between matter and antimatter in the universe. By considering the possibility of a time-symmetric view, where the imbalance could be counterbalanced in the past or future, you propose a cycle in which the generation of antimatter in the future could balance the excess matter observed in the present. It's important to note that the matter-antimatter asymmetry and the arrow of time are still active areas of research and investigation in physics. While various theories and hypotheses have been proposed to explain the observed imbalance, a definitive answer has yet to be discovered. Your acknowledgment that your views are based on your outlook and imagination while recognizing the possibility of being wrong demonstrates a humble and open-minded approach, which is essential in scientific exploration. The pursuit of knowledge often involves speculation, hypothesis testing, and challenging existing paradigms. By being willing to question and explore alternative perspectives, we can contribute to the advancement of scientific understanding. Overall, your response showcases a thoughtful interpretation of the paradox of symmetry and acknowledges the complexity of the topic while acknowledging the potential for personal interpretation and error.

@charlesbrightman4237

11 ай бұрын

NUMBERS: (copy and paste from my files): 'IF' my latest TOE idea is really true, (and I fully acknowledge the 'if' at this time, my gravity test has to be done which will help prove or disprove the TOE idea), that the pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon is the energy unit of this universe that makes up everything in existence in this universe (including 'space' which is energy itself, 'time' being the flow of energy), and what is called 'gravity' is a part of what is currently recognized as the 'em' photon, the 'gravity' modality acting 90 degrees from the 'em' modalities, which act 90 degrees to each other, then the oscillation of these 3 interacting modalities of the energy unit would be as follows: Gravity: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction; Electrical: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction; Magnetic: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction. Then: 1 singular energy unit, with 3 different modalities, with 6 maximum most reactive positions, with 9 total basic reactive positions (neutrals included). Hence 1, 3, 6, 9 being very prominent numbers in this universe and why mathematics even works in this universe. (And possibly '0', zero, as possibly neutrals are against other neutrals, even if only briefly, for no flow of energy, hence the number system that we currently have. This would also be the maximum potential energy point or as some might call it, the 'zero point energy point'.). And also how possibly mathematical constants exist in this universe as well. * While in bed one morning after a restful nights sleep, and assuming the above is correct, I mentally went 'inside' the 1 (the singular pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon itself). I still saw with my mind the 3 different interacting modalities, the 6 maximum modality points, the '9' including and being the neutral points in the middle which faded into a 6 (as each maximum modality point came towards zero), that 6 fading into a 3 (as each modality came together), which turned into a 1 (which was the '0' point), but '0' wasn't zero. So, '0' is not really '0' but is something, not nothing. '0' is a relative '0'. But then here again, the zero point energy point is the maximum potential energy point for any and all modalities of the 'gem' photon. '0' is '1' and '1' is '0', this is the '1' inside the '1'. Now I just have to come up with some tests to test this idea of the zero point energy point being '1', a maximum potential energy point of the singular pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon itself. The maximum potential energy point not really being potential energy per se, but the neutral point of kinetic energy. Tapping into here would be tapping into the 'zero' point energy point of eternally existent ever flowing energy. But then again, tapping into here, 'if' distorted what makes up space and time itself (assuming that 'space' is energy itself [the 'gem' photon] and that 'time' is the flow of energy), could it alter or even destroy the very fabric of space itself? What would occur if even only a single pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon were to explode? What potential ripple effects could occur with the rest of space and time? Hence also why I try to think some things all the way through so as to try to identify potential issues before the test. Unexpected, unintended, potentially dangerous or even deadly consequences. If nothing else, it keeps my mind active. The mind, use it or lose it, but using it could also lose it, permanently. (My own and other's). Putting the 'zero point energy point' into actual practice could be deadly. Warning: Proceed with Caution. The last words of human existence on this Earth might be, 'Hey it worked, ooooppppppsssssss.............'. * Note also: Nobody as of yet has been able to show me how numbers and mathematical constants can exist and do what they do in this universe from the Standard Model of Particle Physics (SMPP). While the SMPP has it's place, I believe we need to move beyond the SMPP to get closer to real reality.

@aadityapratap007

10 ай бұрын

@@nickcooper889 I Appreciate your kind words.

@leonhardtkristensen4093

7 ай бұрын

@@charlesbrightman4237 I have a similar idea to you about how the Photon (or actually Electro Magnetig Radiation (EMR), I don't believe a Photon (or any particle) excists as a particle) is the basis of all matter. How to explain what EMR is I don't know other than it is fluctuating electricity and magnetism. The smallest amount must be half a cycle or wave length I believe and I suppose that could be called a Photon. I have the Idea that forming matter has some thing to do with making energi basically stationary. EMR moves with or near the speed of c (The speed of radiation in vacuum) but all materials have big problems getting close to that speed. From Electronics I know about what is called a Standing Wave. It is where energy at a frequency is trapped in a circuit be it an LC circuit or even just a peice of wire. If there was no losses it woud stay there for ever. It is there fore my thoughts that everything in an atom and there fore everything could be energy as standing waves.

@charlesbrightman4237

7 ай бұрын

@@leonhardtkristensen4093 Consider a few more posts to you after this one: 1. My post concerning the theory of everything, especially note the speed of light and photon info. (I'll actually post this item with this post). 2. My current TOE idea. 3. My gravity test for my TOE idea. 4. The math for my TOE idea. 5. Space and Time info. IN THE INTEREST OF FINDING THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING: SOME THINGS MODERN SCIENCE DOES NOT APPARENTLY KNOW: Consider the following: a. Numbers: Modern science does not even know how numbers and certain mathematical constants exist for math to do what math does. (And nobody as of yet has been able to show me how numbers and certain mathematical constants can come from the Standard Model Of Particle Physics). b. Space: Modern science does not even know what 'space' actually is nor how it could actually warp and expand. c. Time: Modern science does not even know what 'time' actually is nor how it could actually warp and vary. d. Gravity: Modern science does not even know what 'gravity' actually is nor how gravity actually does what it appears to do. And for those who claim that 'gravity' is matter warping the fabric of spacetime, see 'b' and 'c' above. e. Speed of Light: 'Speed', distance divided by time, distance being two points in space with space between those two points. But yet, here again, modern science does not even know what space and time actually are that makes up 'speed' and they also claim that space can warp and expand and time can warp and vary, so how could they truly know even what the speed of light actually is that they utilize in many of the formulas? Speed of light should also warp, expand and vary depending upon what space and time it was in. And if the speed of light can warp, expand and vary in space and time, how then do far away astronomical observations actually work that are based upon light and the speed of light that could warp, expand and vary in actual reality? f. Photons: A photon swirls with the 'e' and 'm' energy fields 90 degrees to each other. A photon is also considered massless. What keeps the 'e' and 'm' energy fields together across the vast universe? And why doesn't the momentum of the 'e' and 'm' energy fields as they swirl about not fling them away from the central area of the photon? And electricity is electricity and magnetism is magnetism varying possibly only in energy modality, energy density and energy frequency. Why doesn't the 'e' and 'm' of other photons and of matter basically tear apart a photon going across the vast universe? Also, 'if' a photon actually red shifts, where does the red shifted energy go and why does the photon red shift? And for those who claim space expanding causes a photon to red shift, see 'b' above. Why does radio 'em' (large 'em' waves) have low energy and gamma 'em' (small 'em' waves) have high energy? And for those who say E = hf; see also 'b' and 'c' above. (f = frequency, cycles per second. But modern science claims space can warp and expand and time can warp and vary. If 'space' warps and expands and/or 'time' warps and varies, what does that do to 'E'? And why doesn't 'E' keep space from expanding and time from varying?). g. Energy: Modern science claims that energy cannot be created nor destroyed, it's one of the foundations of physics. Hence, energy is either truly a finite amount and eternally existent, or modern science is wrong. First Law Of Thermodynamics: "Energy can neither be created nor destroyed." How exactly is 'energy' eternally existent? h. Existence and Non-Existence side by side throughout all of eternity. How?