Behind the NumbersSven Gelbhaar05.11.2018 Beauty in Mathematics comes from — among other things — concision. To thatend, allow me to reduce the original equation for the solving of a perfectsquare using just addition and subtraction into something that looks a lot moreconcise. The original formula published back in April of 2011 was: X² = (x-1) […]
Behind the Numbers Read More »
On Black HolesSven Gelbhaar10/16/2018 Black holes have been a thorn in humanity’s understanding of the cosmos sincetheir inception. They follow as a result of General Relativity which purportsthat gravity bends time and space, and therefore light, as it travels close by amassive object. When this bending reaches maximum (infinity in the case ofGeneral Relativity) then
The Paradox of 1 = 0.9 repeatingSven Gelbhaar06:35 05.10.2018 The problem is: 1/3 = 0.3 repeating. 3 * 1/3 = 1 = 0.9 repeating 0.9 repeating cannot exist in empirical/objective/physical world.Irrational/rational (decimal vs fractions) don’t exist. Let’s explore somepossible reconciliations. Maybe it has to deal with the base of our calculations (10 in the above
The Paradox of 1 = 0.9 repeating Read More »
The Problems of Contemporary ScienceSven Gelbhaar20.09.2018 There are two main problems: the gullible populace, and the charlatans who prey on them.People are more concerned with feel-good explanations of physical phenomena than truth.Take the Heisenberg Principle, for instance. Because light is reactive, we cannotdetermine its three main attributes of speed, direction, and location. The charlatanspicked this
The Problems of Contemporary Science Read More »
On Mach’s Principle and ConjectureSven Gelbhaar15:17 16.09.2018 Wikipedia posits: freely at your side, and you see that the distant stars are not moving. Nowstart spinning. The stars are whirling around you and your arms are pulled awayfrom your body. Why should your arms be pulled away when the stars are whirling?Why should they be dangling
On Mach’s Principle and Conjecture Read More »
On the charge of protonsSven Gelbhaar09/08/2018 We all know protons have an inverse charge to electrons, but how great is thatcharge. Current theory states that it has a positive (+1) charge, whereaselectrons have a negative (-1) charge however that may be incorrect. Inprevious papers we explored what would happen to a lone electron near a
On the charge of protons Read More »
Gradients of truthSven Gelbhaar8/21/2018 What do we mean when we say “something is like something-else?” We mean thatthey share some set of attribute(s). Maybe the same primary color; maybeweight; or maybe something entirely abstract like “good.” We deal with a ratherchaotic world, where nothing is precisely 1 unit of measurement, or even theexact same color.
Gradients of truth Read More »
To disarm a radioactive object, one must scatter it. I’m thinking that a shapedcharge of conventional explosives would seal the deal, using rare earth magnetsto repel a series, or even slabs, of the fissible material into the opposite ofa state of super-criticality. Now all we need is a delivery method/vector.Based upon expansion rate of slicers,
On Nuclear Countermeasures, Continued Read More »
On antimatter interaction with matterSven Gelbhaar05/15/2018 Matter-antimatter collision results in heavier element(s) depending on how manyelectrons you start out with and retain through the merger. positrons wouldattach to electrons. Sheer # of extant electrons (vs positrons) biases theseinteractions to result in matter (vs antimatter configurations). if a positively charged nucleus merges with a negatively one,
On antimatter interaction with matter Read More »
that what Kant opposed as thing-in-itself to mere appearance (called moredecidedly by me “representation”) and what he held to be absolutely unknowable,that this thing-in-itself, I say, this substratum of all appearances, andtherefore of the whole of Nature, is nothing but what we know directly andintimately and find within ourselves as will; that accordingly, this will,