#A Conceptual Approach to Time, Flow, and Existence
19 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)
I'm not a mathematician or a scientist
So you're so thoroughly unqualified that you aren't even qualified enough to understand how unqualified you are.
I used Artificial Intelligence
That doesn't exist, at least at the commercially available level. You might've used a text generator, which literally only means that whatever you're talking about might be grammatically correct English.
You don't want dialogue, you just want to prove that you know more, or you think you know. It's just a vision I had and decided to share to see if it resonated with someone. So, I did my part, I shared the idea, I am clear and I leave you
I don't want "dialogue" with you about a physics thing you completely made up with the help of an automatic book report machine because I want you to understand that physics is complicated and millions of literal geniuses have spent literally their entire lives thinking about it, so no, you didn't have a revolutionary or likely even accurate new idea about it in a fucking dream.
Your response is nothing more than a slew of condescension disguised as "intellectual rigor."
Are you interested in learning physics, or in making shit up about it? That's the fundamental question.
I'm interested in exploring ideas, and learning, what about you? Do you want to share knowledge or just measure superiority?
It wasn't a dream, it was a vision.
If you want to do that then don't make stuff up look at relevant evidence and base it on that, and make proofs.
Also, that equation is filled with typos
Take a look at your own formula
What is *t+
What is +* integral
What is E()d
Like, I get that you don't understand math and this formula should be a loose representation of the dynamics on larger scale, but this simply does not mean anything and cannot be understood
Ooh you don't know latex, there are ASCII Greek letters in your sourcecode
Use /alpha and /beta etc next time
Even when reading the sourcecode of your formula with Greek letters included, it's just a randomly made up formula.
I'm sorry but there is nothing substantial happening here. There are plenty physicists who actually studied for this and have good differential equations and laws already.
I'm afraid it's an unavoidable truth that you need to study and understand advanced physics and therefore advanced math before being able to bring anything new to the table
I don’t understand, energy seems to have been presented as a periodic function of time here, what are the factors which lead to this?
Conservation of energy already says that in an isolated system, total energy is always conserved. I don’t understand why you expressed energy as a periodic function, and what “decay” means rationally, what are the factors influencing the energy decay?
That too periodically.
It’s okay, you still have time, try reading books on Physics and Mathematics, I am sure you will get a hold on those subjects theoretically in 3-4 years.(If you really study hard).
reaction for more information.