New idea; Theortical physics

I think you were sitting in the path and smoking weed.
Take physics 101 course from a nearby college, cause I'm too lazy to correct your wrong mode of thinking.

So I'm wrong? But you con't explain how ? lol & yeah I was smoking a fat joint I eventaully fell asleep in the bath and woke up and it was all cold n ****.

You can kinda tell that I'm still stoned in my typing, heaps of typo's and spelling mistakes, crack ups.

Sounds like you got the right idea, don't let your mind be constraied to the typical mainstream way of thinking

Better by far to just make stuff up as you go along.

It sounds like that's what he was doing

The concepts of "right" and "wrong" in theoretical physics are based on utility, elegance, and predictive power of a model...i.e the generation of new data. Mystical/religious one-liners have nothing to do with it unless you want to confuse "poetry" with "elegance". On the other hand, arguments by analogy, are common in suggesting what to observe (as in the early application, but later rejection, of the solar system model to atomic structure).

Phlogiston chemistry and recreational pharmacology aver your every thought.

I don't think that has really much to do with my idea, Reading back my idea i didn't explain it very well but I still agree with it. It's easier to understand in my own mind obviously

That's actualy the first time I've herd about the expanding earth hypothesis. I'm not sure if I agree with it or not, I don't even fully understnd it. But It kind of makes sense if it were the rich people in this world would wont to cover it up.

I think admiting that 100 years of science has been wrong is also too much for most scientists to handle especailly since they grew up their whole lives following certain beliefs.

More speculation; Let's say the expanding earth theory was true, and let's also say my theory is true, if both of these theorys were truth then their would be an energy source out their that most scientists don't recogonize. accept of cause quantum physicsts. They call it the quantum vacuum flux. Making sense of this vacuum flux is a whole differnet matter.

I think for modern science to accept the earth is expanding and that it's doing so on some etheric energy would be to admit were ******* up big time, beacuse we could be using this etheric energy with unlinimted potential. Of course if we had free energy that would change the whole power & socail structure of the peoples. If energy was free, food would be free, and if you own your own home then you would essentially not need money. Humanity being the way it is at the moment can't allow that.

Sad really because money does controll science.

What's up man. Now I'd like you to refund the brain cells which I had to use to remember your comment.
Ok, thanks.

thinking doesn't use brain cells it strengths their nueral pathways if anything.

And smoking weed doesn't kill brain cells like some stupid scientists from the 70's 'proved' What they actually did was pump weed smoke into a monkeys lungs for 5 minutes then test their brains, sure ennough 5 minutes of no oxygen is gonna kill alot of brain cells.

It's good to think "out of the box." That's the only way humans can discover new things.

Here's a link to the latest findings on atoms.

http://news.discovery.com/tech/lhc-atom-smasher-discovery.html

You're hopeless.
Communication between brain cells, neurons, is what allows us to think. Thinking does use brain cells.

All your answers to the questions you seek, can be generally found here: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/hph.html

Especially check out these two:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/heacon.html#heacon
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/emcon.html#emcon

It is free, so take some time to read through it before making things up.


To correct that mode of wrong thinking, check out:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/qapp.html#c3

I know it use's brain cells, what I was saying is that it doesn't "use up" brain cells, no brain cells die in the process ... Don't be so conjective.