Some personal thoughts regarding modern physics, the concept of negative energy, radiation, gravity and spacetime.

[Nutsack]

Hi, I was thinking about physics today and came to some questions I would love it if you could debate them with me.

If I am right that singularity was the dividing point between anti-matter and matter, where which chaos must have existed for there to become more matter than there is anti-matter (Baryon Asymmetry). Has it been thought of already? The concept of anti-energy, and perhaps anti-gravity, anti-spacetime? it would explain the dark energy theories, which I believe might have been a terrible mistake in terminology to have been named in description of the polar opposite of energy (to the opposite of pure photons, anti-energy is a more sensible term). Perhaps some anomalies in astronomy and physics, which are thought to be caused by some variable that is beyond our capability to even study, perhaps, those variables are anti-matter, anti-energy, and anti-gravity? What would explain why it is impossible for us to study is because the polar opposite of positive energy is of course, negative energy, and that is probably beyond our observable part of the universe for that very reason - like the other side of a black hole (it doesn't exist within our universe, perhaps negative energy, matter, spacetime and gravity is another part of our universe which we do not exist within).

It might also help to explain black holes? They are manifestations of the anti-spacetime, am I not right (what I mean by anti-spacetime is time and space in the negative spectrum, like for example -1 instead of 1).



Edit: All of this, of course, must fundamentally be beyond our limits of empirical study, and will for always be nothing but empty theoretical thoughts - kind of like the impossibility of studying physics inside a black hole.

2nd Edit: I have a big test tomorrow so I have to study and go to bed, but I couldn't help but to come think of these things for some reason. I came to think if it was possible that there might exist negative radiation as well?

3rd Edit: I mean if there is theories on how dark(anti) energy is the cause for the expanding accelaration of our universe, then does that not leave room for the possibility of there being dark(anti) gravity as well. A force which unlike what the term anti-gravity traditionally sais, is not a place or object free from gravity - instead it is the opposite of positive gravity which attracts matter to one another. Negative gravity I am thinking is the opposite of force - not the moving an object (traditional physics of energy and movement) what we have instead is the retraction of matter, energy and time.

I am thinking to myself that perhaps this is one of the reasons our universe is expanding, because there is a clear divide between what is (x), and what is not (-x)(positive energy/matter/spacetime = x, negative energy/matter/spacetime -x). We are positive energy, something that is orderly and can be clumped together, shaped into big bodies of rocks like planets or suns, or be organized into animals and life. If all there was (and could be) in the universe was positive energy, then perhaps there would be a singularity without the big bang. In order for the universe to expand there has to exist something which is the opposite of clumpy, energy that attracts itself to one another. I'm hoping that might explain the theories of dark-energy, dark(anti) matter, black holes and perhaps the possible phenomena of negative radiation and spacetime.

And if negative spacetime is what might be causing the expansion of universe, I don't know how I am going to stand a chance in explaining my thoughts of how the expansion of space is going to somehow be explained as the opposite of spacetime. Perhaps spacetime is somehow bound to the force of gravity - making positive spacetime bend and compress to gravity (if no negative counterpart was given then the universe would compress itself to singularity again). And the opposite (negative gravity), being the force that pulls everything apart, is affecting space-time to the point where the universe is expanding faster than it is contracting.

[Larkin]

I think you're too clever for this website.

[Sphere]

I can only suggest more reading and less thinking.

There is little to work with here.

[Nutsack]

I can only suggest more reading and less thinking.

There is little to work with here.

Thanks, I do understand that this is simply a train of thought. My theories are so that they would be completely impossible to gather empirical evidence in support of - and with that lies the weakness of it. It is merely thoughts on how our universe might be evidence of an anti-universe, or a negative plane of everything that exists. My only attempt to explain this mathematically is that if the universe = x, then there might or must be a possibility of -x. Like the other side of a black hole, any hope to gather data is lost.

I think you're too clever for this website.

No, I am really not clever - I do think of myself as a weird human being, I have certain impulses that are not appreciated by people in society. But even despite that, I do manage to cope well with other people and have found myself a comfortable place besides all of you other people out there. I do like to believe that I have good sense of self-reflection, but sometimes I come across thoughts that prove that I am terrible at it.

Either way, any point of explaining myself is quite useless. Ask someone "please, explain who you are!", and you will never get the right answers.

[Larkin]

No, I am really not clever - I do think of myself as a weird human being, I have certain impulses that are not appreciated by people in society. But even despite that, I do manage to cope well with other people and have found myself a comfortable place besides all of you other people out there. I do like to believe that I have good sense of self-reflection, but sometimes I come across thoughts that prove that I am terrible at it.

Just the way you write hints at intelligence. Also, I posited some of your theory to a friend of mine, who is studying Physics at the University of Oxford and she had to ponder over it.

Also, these "certain impulses" sound creepy

[Nutsack]

Just the way you write hints at intelligence. Also, I posited some of your theory to a friend of mine, who is studying Physics at the University of Oxford and she had to ponder over it.

Also, these "certain impulses" sound creepy

It's not bad, I tend to be unthoughtful of other people. I leave for other people to do sometimes unconsciously (not intentional, but rather impulsive), likes dishes and cleaning up & . From what I understand I'm basically unthoughtful. I've had enough experience in society to be able to adjust myself to it though, I am adapted to living with other people although sometimes I think I do some anti-social .*

Just FYI, I am naming this the Negative Plane Theory, and I have don't have much evidence to back it up with .

What I guess this basically comes down to is, that for something to exist, there has to be the possibility of something to "unexist". If x=1, then -x=-1... Which brings me to the thoughts of, perhaps the part of the universe we live in, is merely the difference between existance and "unexistance" (which brings us all the way back to our most basic of existential understandings - we exist, as compared to not).

Some of the positive forces in our universe are, gravity, photons (energy), radiation (perhaps radiation also is energy, like matter seems to be made from compressed energy), and spacetime.

Negative forces in our universe seems to be anti-gravity, anti-energy (perhaps anti-radiation), and anti-spacetime.

We all know that gravity seems to pull together the fabric of spacetime. So does that mean that both can be positive forces? Probably not, I wouldn't say one positive dimension cancels out another. The problem is when I discuss the term positive, what is positive? It seems, like I am attributing the term "positive" to a force whenever it is beneficial to the creation of life, which actually seems to be a result of everything there is combined, not exclusively half of the potential forces in the universe.

Could there be something such as a negative joule of energy? Isn't that what dark matter/anti matter is basically the study of? Negative energy? Perhaps this could all come down to be a fundemental law in physics, that for there to exist, there has to be unexistance (for everything positive in the universe, there exists a negative correspondance). if x=1, then -x=-1?

This is what I mean by a negative plane. It is like looking into a mirror, you can see yourself in it, but how can you actually prove that there isn't another person standing in front of you? You can use conventional physics and prove that there is not enough space for another person to exist within the mirror - you can prove that there is not a person behind the mirror, where it appears he should be standing. You can not prove that there is a mirror world to ours - therefore it is incorrect since the burden of proof is always on the claimant. But because all of the data we collect - is limited to our own side of the spectrum, it is impossible to prova that there is another side even at all. Kind of like the black hole and singularity problem - "Mommy, what is on the other side of a black hole, or what was before the universe?", it is completely impossible to know.

I am also thinking of how the universe might be the result of (Ex+E), that is, existance + nonexistance. Or universe + anti-universe). I believe that there might be an anti-universe, which, compared to this one has all it's forces adding to the discreation of our universe. The anti-universe might be, in essence, trying to de-construct everything we know.

For every dimension we know, there is a negative of the same? Space and time?

Whatever... I am so sick of this...

[Timefool]

I don't know if you read this already but: http://van.physics.illinois.edu/qa/listing.php?id=1153

And I propose you name this the Nutsack Theory

[Jack04]

Right, I'll have a go.

Hi, I was thinking about physics today and came to some questions I would love it if you could debate them with me.

If I am right that singularity was the dividing point between anti-matter and matter, where which chaos must have existed for there to become more matter than there is anti-matter (Baryon Asymmetry). Has it been thought of already? The concept of anti-energy, and perhaps anti-gravity, anti-spacetime? it would explain the dark energy theories, which I believe might have been a terrible mistake in terminology to have been named in description of the polar opposite of energy (to the opposite of pure photons, anti-energy is a more sensible term). Perhaps some anomalies in astronomy and physics, which are thought to be caused by some variable that is beyond our capability to even study, perhaps, those variables are anti-matter, anti-energy, and anti-gravity? What would explain why it is impossible for us to study is because the polar opposite of positive energy is of course, negative energy, and that is probably beyond our observable part of the universe for that very reason - like the other side of a black hole (it doesn't exist within our universe, perhaps negative energy, matter, spacetime and gravity is another part of our universe which we do not exist within).

Negative potentials are an entirely real concept. Consider them like a valley lying below the V = 0 line (where V is the potential energy). Any attractive force is the result of a negative potential, however this does not require the existence of negative "real" energies.

There are quantum numbers which describe the existence of anti-matter and matter. Some of those quantum numbers (such as mass) are identical for matter and anti-matter, whilst some are their negative (charge). Matter is not exactly the opposite of anti-matter in the way you might be thinking. There is no analogue for energy, gravity or space-time. I think you might have slightly misunderstood the nature of anti-matter (it is by no means trivial).

2nd Edit: I have a big test tomorrow so I have to study and go to bed, but I couldn't help but to come think of these things for some reason. I came to think if it was possible that there might exist negative radiation as well?

"Negative radiation"? Radiation is the process by which particles (electrons, protons, alphas, photons, etc.) are emitted from an unstable atom/nucleus. "Negative" radiation is the process by which they are absorbed. This happens, in fact, its how the Sun works.

3rd Edit: I mean if there is theories on how dark(anti) energy is the cause for the expanding accelaration of our universe, then does that not leave room for the possibility of there being dark(anti) gravity as well. A force which unlike what the term anti-gravity traditionally sais, is not a place or object free from gravity - instead it is the opposite of positive gravity which attracts matter to one another. Negative gravity I am thinking is the opposite of force - not the moving an object (traditional physics of energy and movement) what we have instead is the retraction of matter, energy and time.

The concept of dark-energy is usually considered as being the result of a positive potential induced within the universe. Which you would consider as the analogue of our universe being raised slightly above the V = 0 level. This doesn't require anti-gravity.

I am thinking to myself that perhaps this is one of the reasons our universe is expanding, because there is a clear divide between what is (x), and what is not (-x)(positive energy/matter/spacetime = x, negative energy/matter/spacetime -x). We are positive energy, something that is orderly and can be clumped together, shaped into big bodies of rocks like planets or suns, or be organized into animals and life. If all there was (and could be) in the universe was positive energy, then perhaps there would be a singularity without the big bang. In order for the universe to expand there has to exist something which is the opposite of clumpy, energy that attracts itself to one another. I'm hoping that might explain the theories of dark-energy, dark(anti) matter, black holes and perhaps the possible phenomena of negative radiation and spacetime.

I think something else you need to understand is that all gravitational potentials are negative. By definition.

And if negative spacetime is what might be causing the expansion of universe, I don't know how I am going to stand a chance in explaining my thoughts of how the expansion of space is going to somehow be explained as the opposite of spacetime. Perhaps spacetime is somehow bound to the force of gravity - making positive spacetime bend and compress to gravity (if no negative counterpart was given then the universe would compress itself to singularity again). And the opposite (negative gravity), being the force that pulls everything apart, is affecting space-time to the point where the universe is expanding faster than it is contracting.

Space-time curvature and gravity are equivalent under general relativity.


Generally, I have to agree with Sphere. There are some very, very good books out there which can allow you to get a very good grasp on some of the concepts (such as matter/antimatter) that you're talking about.

[Nutsack]

Ah ok thanks everyone I have learned a lot. My most important lesson learnt here is that I should be reading more books.

[Mr. Crow]

i was thinking, bout imaginary masses for some time, you know takions, and stuff, i hadn't been able to get them, but know that i think of it, imaginary masses are positive masses in negative space time, thank you.

[Nutsack]

i was thinking, bout imaginary masses for some time, you know takions, and stuff, i hadn't been able to get them, but know that i think of it, imaginary masses are positive masses in negative space time, thank you.

I understand what you mean, and that is a very interesting thoughts. So you were thinking that tachyons are positive mass in negative space time - which might come to explain why they move faster than the speed of light. In my opinion the only way a mass could move faster than the speed of light is if it existed in the mirror-opposite of our world - negative spacetime.

Either way I'm going to read up on this stuff a little more.

and by the way, I can hardly call my thoughts theories, I realize that to have a theory you have to base it on empirical data - which I have not gathered any myself. What I am basing my thoughts of are of course my basic understanding of the mechanics of our universe - in which, I can't help myself but to ignore the differences between photons, radiation and other particles of matter (I consider them the same because I've heard that matter is nothing but concentrated energy, and therefore everything we know is derived from pure energy).