Childhood (not so) crackpot theories

For the discussion of the sciences. Physics problems, chemistry equations, biology weirdness, it all goes here.

Moderators: gmalivuk, Moderators General, Prelates

hitokiriilh
Posts: 244
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2007 9:15 pm UTC
Location: UVa
Contact:

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby hitokiriilh » Fri Aug 15, 2008 3:54 am UTC

Cryopyre wrote:Dark matter (or dark energy, I'm honestly not sure) was exhaust from alien and uneven Alcubierre metrics.

Even further back...

Matter is a dent in space

[imath]G^{\mu \nu}=8\pi T^{\mu \nu}[/imath] (Einstein field equations) suggests that's not such a crackpot idea. ;) I'm actually interested in rewriting Lagrangians in physics by treating the equations the particles that generate fields obey as constraints and substituting them back into the Lagrangian. This effectively eliminates particles as independent entities in physics (you have fields and the particles that generate them, but this would remove the particles and just work with fields), demands the unification of all fields (otherwise one can't consistently eliminate the particles from all Lagrangians - ones that account forE&M, gravity, strong, and weak interactions - simultaneously), and would treat all of nature in a geometric fashion (<3 geometry). In this light, matter literally is just a dent in space. ;)



Actually, I do remember telling my dad that if spiral galaxies spin then we probably orbit black holes, he was all like, I don't think so, it's just the collective mass.

Proved him wrong.


This is either already accepted or strongly supported - I can't remember which.

Whatever the case, your crackpot theories are pretty damn insightful my friend! :D

User avatar
Fledermen64
Posts: 428
Joined: Thu Feb 14, 2008 9:29 pm UTC

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby Fledermen64 » Fri Aug 15, 2008 4:23 am UTC

When I was 12 I theorized that the universe is expanding for the same reason gas expands in a vacuum. Just on a much larger scale. Needless to say I had very little grasp of thermodynamics back then. I even have all the papers I wrote about it (In colored pencil)

One other not so crackpot theory/observation i had when I was about nine is that if the universe is really infinite there is nothing stopping it from being infinitely small as well and we very well could be just an atom in some other larger universe and be filled with tiny universes the size of atoms at the same time. I didn't like that idea very much so i figured that there must be some limit to how small something could be and that that must be what messes with the orbits of electrons. (I loved the discovery channel and science books at that age. Still do)
"I just want to say before I do this that I have no idea what I'm doing and I love you all very dearly. Ok lets light this bitch and hope for the best"
-Myself before a homemade 4th of July fireworks extravaganza

User avatar
Iori_Yagami
Posts: 606
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2007 8:37 pm UTC

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby Iori_Yagami » Fri Aug 15, 2008 6:39 am UTC

Wow. Just how those theories in the thread qualify as childhood? I still don't know what is wrong with them, (only maybe they sound so ... complicated).
I used to think there is a large rocky field outside of space. What was outside that field, I didn't think about. I also thought that moon hides in the well during the day.
I thought that every liquid is water with dissolved particles - water + cinder = oil. I thought that every piece of rock had 'filling' of lava inside.
Last edited by Iori_Yagami on Fri Aug 15, 2008 7:08 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
They cannot defend themselves; they cannot run away. INSANITY is their only way of escape.

ACU-LP
Posts: 2826
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2008 12:39 pm UTC
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby ACU-LP » Fri Aug 15, 2008 4:04 pm UTC

Not really a theory, more of a fantasy, but I thought (when I was 6-7) that by the time I'm older genetic engineering would have gotten to the stage that I could have myself a pokemon. or a raptor. or a dragon. or all
yeah.
damn.
ah well, this is awesome stuff guys, I've started looking through my storage of childhood things to see if I had any other theories I dont remember.
At least for now, this topic has been sig linked.
I Am Raven wrote:Math is like a penis: it can be very satisfactory, but also a pain in the ass.
Red vs Blue wrote:Wash: That was the worst throw ever. Of all time.
Caboose: Not my fault. Someone put a wall in my way.

User avatar
zaqwithaq
Posts: 52
Joined: Sat May 03, 2008 10:19 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby zaqwithaq » Sat Aug 16, 2008 4:21 pm UTC

I remember in 2nd grade thinking: if we could run a generator with the energy it put off we could have infinite energy...and then I remember asking which metals didn't conduct electricity...since none of them didn't, i decided we should encase this amazing machine in clay....

also i came up with the idea for communism at that same age. "So if you were a pizza maker you just had to make 100$ worth of pizza a month...and then if you wanted a camera you could just take it from the 'camera maker' who made 100$ worth of cameras a month"
I honestly not sure to do for more expensive things......
Spoiler:
Image

nekolux
Posts: 27
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 3:00 pm UTC

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby nekolux » Sat Aug 16, 2008 5:13 pm UTC

I used to have this phobia for insects ( still am slightly phobic lol ). Right then i read some where about wormholes and stuff and well basically i thought that wormholes are always present on earth except the human eye cannot see them. And well i pictured the wormhole as a giant wormhole..... yeah and insects flooded through them onto earth. Insects could see and make use of them freely of course... i hate worms too :P


Some part of me still believe this.... i mean sometimes i swear i hit the damn fly but it just disappears!

User avatar
Sir_Elderberry
Posts: 4206
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 6:50 pm UTC
Location: Sector ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha
Contact:

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby Sir_Elderberry » Sat Aug 16, 2008 5:29 pm UTC

zaqwithaq wrote:I remember in 2nd grade thinking: if we could run a generator with the energy it put off we could have infinite energy...and then I remember asking which metals didn't conduct electricity...since none of them didn't, i decided we should encase this amazing machine in clay....


Oh, that reminds me. In addition to my battery + transformer idea, I also thought of a solar powered floodlight that shined back on the solar panels, thus the solar panels got infinite energy.

also i came up with the idea for communism at that same age. "So if you were a pizza maker you just had to make 100$ worth of pizza a month...and then if you wanted a camera you could just take it from the 'camera maker' who made 100$ worth of cameras a month"
I honestly not sure to do for more expensive things......


I had a similar idea, but it was just that everything would be made free. So if I want to go build a house, I go get lumber and rock and a builder and it's just given to me. Nobody has to get paid because the food and all is free as well. Somehow I thought that nobody would abuse this.
http://www.geekyhumanist.blogspot.com -- Science and the Concerned Voter
Belial wrote:You are the coolest guy that ever cooled.

I reiterate. Coolest. Guy.

Well. You heard him.

User avatar
telcontar42
Posts: 430
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 10:33 pm UTC
Location: Davis, CA
Contact:

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby telcontar42 » Sat Aug 16, 2008 5:42 pm UTC

ACU-LP wrote:Not really a theory, more of a fantasy, but I thought (when I was 6-7) that by the time I'm older genetic engineering would have gotten to the stage that I could have myself a pokemon. or a raptor. or a dragon. or all
yeah.
damn.
ah well, this is awesome stuff guys, I've started looking through my storage of childhood things to see if I had any other theories I dont remember.
At least for now, this topic has been sig linked.

Yeah, I also thought that we would be able to genetically engineer dragons. Actually, I planned to develop this technology myself so that I could make an army of dragons that I could use to take over the world. Then after I had brought the world under my control, I would choose one continent to release all the dragons into. This would provide me with a place to send all the people I didn't like. This was just one of my plots for world domination.

User avatar
chancedude2OOO
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 5:08 am UTC
Location: In America

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby chancedude2OOO » Sat Aug 16, 2008 9:09 pm UTC

My theory in the third or fourth grade was based off of my idea of conservation of momentum. In order to go "up" you need to push something else "down" in some way, to go left, something needs to go right, etc.
Anyway, I thought that time would be the same. That, during the big bang, for every particle pushed "forward" in time, there was something pushed in the opposite "direction" to conserve momentum in the time dimension.
This also logically would lead time machines being possible if we could find out some way to push off in the "direction" of time. We just haven't figured out a way to push anything in that dimension yet.

ACU-LP
Posts: 2826
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2008 12:39 pm UTC
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby ACU-LP » Sun Aug 17, 2008 1:16 am UTC

Another sort-of theory of mine was that dragons did exist, but for one reason or another we cant find them.
I thought that they were the civilisation before us. I decided that they couldn't have been heavily armored as they wouldnt be able to fly then, they'd use enzymes that would get hydrogen from their food, allowing them to be lighter and let them use their wings to fly (despite their size). I also remember at the time hearing about some ore that existed at the times that dragons exist in mythology; that would cause hydrogen to ignite. Hence their fire breathing ability.
I "proved" their existence by the fact that the dragons of different areas of the planet were adapted to their environment (from what we see from mythology), before people knew of that sort of concept. Yeah.

Damn.
I Am Raven wrote:Math is like a penis: it can be very satisfactory, but also a pain in the ass.
Red vs Blue wrote:Wash: That was the worst throw ever. Of all time.
Caboose: Not my fault. Someone put a wall in my way.

User avatar
rutebega
Posts: 46
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 1:54 am UTC

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby rutebega » Sun Aug 17, 2008 1:35 am UTC

As a child, I conceived of a perfect, omnipotent, omniscient originator and ruler of the universe.

Roland the Headless
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:22 am UTC

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby Roland the Headless » Sun Aug 17, 2008 1:40 am UTC

rutebega wrote:As a child, I conceived of a perfect, omnipotent, omniscient originator and ruler of the universe.

Haha, now that is a crazy idea. Silly childhood crackpot theories.

hitokiriilh
Posts: 244
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2007 9:15 pm UTC
Location: UVa
Contact:

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby hitokiriilh » Sun Aug 17, 2008 3:40 am UTC

chancedude2OOO wrote:My theory in the third or fourth grade was based off of my idea of conservation of momentum. In order to go "up" you need to push something else "down" in some way, to go left, something needs to go right, etc.
Anyway, I thought that time would be the same. That, during the big bang, for every particle pushed "forward" in time, there was something pushed in the opposite "direction" to conserve momentum in the time dimension.
This also logically would lead time machines being possible if we could find out some way to push off in the "direction" of time. We just haven't figured out a way to push anything in that dimension yet.


Let the time-reversal operator hit a wave function for a particle and you magically have its anti-particle. Antimatter is matter going backwards in time and it's actually a mystery why there isn't just as much antimatter as matter. So yet another person on the fora has had a not-so-crackpot crackpot theory. ;)

User avatar
Sir_Elderberry
Posts: 4206
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 6:50 pm UTC
Location: Sector ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha
Contact:

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby Sir_Elderberry » Sun Aug 17, 2008 4:14 am UTC

At this rate, somewhere in this thread will appear/has appeared the TOE.
http://www.geekyhumanist.blogspot.com -- Science and the Concerned Voter
Belial wrote:You are the coolest guy that ever cooled.

I reiterate. Coolest. Guy.

Well. You heard him.

ACU-LP
Posts: 2826
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2008 12:39 pm UTC
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby ACU-LP » Sun Aug 17, 2008 8:02 am UTC

Sir_Elderberry wrote:At this rate, somewhere in this thread will appear/has appeared the TOE.


Forgive my noobishness....but TOE?
I Am Raven wrote:Math is like a penis: it can be very satisfactory, but also a pain in the ass.
Red vs Blue wrote:Wash: That was the worst throw ever. Of all time.
Caboose: Not my fault. Someone put a wall in my way.

hitokiriilh
Posts: 244
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2007 9:15 pm UTC
Location: UVa
Contact:

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby hitokiriilh » Sun Aug 17, 2008 8:10 am UTC

ACU-LP wrote:
Sir_Elderberry wrote:At this rate, somewhere in this thread will appear/has appeared the TOE.


Forgive my noobishness....but TOE?


Theory of everything
GUT=grand unified theory

ACU-LP
Posts: 2826
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2008 12:39 pm UTC
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby ACU-LP » Sun Aug 17, 2008 11:19 am UTC

Cool thanks. Obviously I knew of these things...I just suck a little at abbreviations.
I Am Raven wrote:Math is like a penis: it can be very satisfactory, but also a pain in the ass.
Red vs Blue wrote:Wash: That was the worst throw ever. Of all time.
Caboose: Not my fault. Someone put a wall in my way.

User avatar
Macbi
Posts: 941
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 8:32 am UTC
Location: UKvia

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby Macbi » Sun Aug 17, 2008 11:34 am UTC

z4lis wrote:I once entertained the idea that the universe was a series of shells stacked one inside the other. At the center of all the shells was a strange point that pulsated continuously, spitting out new shells. Between each shells was a separate universe. I then conjectured that when matter or energy struck one of these shells, it was changed into energy or matter, respectively.

The Ian M. Banks Culture novels? He has 3-spheres being pushed out of a central point with a universe between each shell, and as an added bonus energy can be drawn from these shells.
    Indigo is a lie.
    Which idiot decided that websites can't go within 4cm of the edge of the screen?
    There should be a null word, for the question "Is anybody there?" and to see if microphones are on.

User avatar
Beacons!
Posts: 213
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 2:17 pm UTC
Location: The Grand Unifying Intermahweb

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby Beacons! » Sun Aug 17, 2008 2:05 pm UTC

poxic wrote:Just remembered a time/universe theory of my own (unfortunately, I can't blame this one on childhood, just altered states and unbridled creativity).

Multiple bazillions of universes exist, crisscrossing each other at all points through a bazillion dimensions. The track of your life is the trace your consciousness follows as it moves from one moment to the next, generally within the same bundle of very-similar universes.

If you try really, really hard to change your world, though, through positive thinking or transcendence or whathaveyou, you can edge your life-track over to slightly more distant universe-tracks and continue your life there, where things might be better. Or worse, if you push yourself through negative thinking and decadence.

It was a lovely hypothesis; however, it rather suffered from lack of observable evidence.

Edit: the edging of one's life-track to other uni-tracks depended on one changing one's vibrations/resonance/energy/thingummy to match that of the desired uni-track. Way way too New Age to ... confess to. :oops:


On the same sort of note, I always like to think that the world we experience is the one in which we live the longest. So if something weird happens in your life you can always think that it's probably best for you in the long run. But that's not really a childhood theory, I'm just a bit too much of a philosophical physicist.

As for childhood theories, I used to believe time to be circular. Therefore when we die, we just wake up born again into the same life. Somehow I used this to prove god, not quite sure how. I've got a diagram in a homework planner somewhere...
"Woof!", explained the dog

User avatar
rho
Posts: 174
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 9:14 pm UTC
Location: UK

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby rho » Sun Aug 17, 2008 7:13 pm UTC

phlip wrote:When I was in high school Physics, around the time we learned conservation of momentum... I was convinced that if you added up the momentum of everything in the universe, you could find the sort-of net velocity of the universe... which would give you an absolute reference frame to measure velocities against...

Actually, looking back, it wan't quite so crackpottish... aside from the unfeasibility of actually measuring the momentum of the universe, is there any reason why this wouldn't work? Some relativistic effect I've forgotten (and hadn't learned yet, at the time)?


I used to think that if you found the velocity, position and mass of every particle in the universe, you'd be able to predict the future. I didn't actually think this was practicable, I just thought it demonstrated our complete lack of free will. Then I read about the uncertainty principle and was forced to concede that free will is a bit more complicated than I'd thought. As is the rest of the universe.

But yeah, I guess if you perfectly measured the momentum of EVERYTHING in the universe, you wouldn't actually know where anything was. Which could be awkward?


My younger sister used to tell me: 'When you're little, you'll understand.'
She was so convinced of her own superiority that she thought, being the littlest, people grew younger with wisdom. I wish it were true!
Less Than Three.

hitokiriilh
Posts: 244
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2007 9:15 pm UTC
Location: UVa
Contact:

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby hitokiriilh » Sun Aug 17, 2008 7:51 pm UTC

rho wrote:
phlip wrote:When I was in high school Physics, around the time we learned conservation of momentum... I was convinced that if you added up the momentum of everything in the universe, you could find the sort-of net velocity of the universe... which would give you an absolute reference frame to measure velocities against...

Actually, looking back, it wan't quite so crackpottish... aside from the unfeasibility of actually measuring the momentum of the universe, is there any reason why this wouldn't work? Some relativistic effect I've forgotten (and hadn't learned yet, at the time)?


I used to think that if you found the velocity, position and mass of every particle in the universe, you'd be able to predict the future. I didn't actually think this was practicable, I just thought it demonstrated our complete lack of free will. Then I read about the uncertainty principle and was forced to concede that free will is a bit more complicated than I'd thought. As is the rest of the universe.


I read a paper about how quantum mechanical uncertainty implies free will exists. That's just silly - I guess electrons have just as much free will as us. :roll:

I'd still say your conclusion was right though. If thoughts are constrained by physical law (having an ongoing argument in the Holy Ghost discussion thread over this) I'd say free will has been pretty thoroughly challenged.

But yeah, I guess if you perfectly measured the momentum of EVERYTHING in the universe, you wouldn't actually know where anything was. Which could be awkward?


This is a slight popular misnomer. If you measured the momentum of a particle then asked for its position, it's not like the computers are going to say "nope, you know its momentum, you can't have its position and I must obey the uncertainty principle." You will get a definite answer, but if you switch between measuring momentum and position repeatedly, you'd just get different answers each time - it'll never be fixed. The uncertainty principle just tells the relationship between the standard distribution of momentum and position distributions.

Consequently, even if you knew the momentum of everything in the universe, you'd still see positions, you just wouldn't be able to predict them - at all.

Also, this brings up a good problem with the orthodox interpretation of quantum mechanics. Everything in the universe interacts in a way and consequently all systems are strictly entangled, albeit possibly very weakly. We're part of the universe, so technically our quantum states should be in a superposition and we shouldn't be able to consistently know where we are or where everything else in the universe is - if the electron is in multiple states and something in a superposition of states measures it, why should it collapse to an eigenstate? It's really a silly interpretation. Anti-realism kind of strikes me as a radical perspective to have...seems to throw everything we know away.

My younger sister used to tell me: 'When you're little, you'll understand.'
She was so convinced of her own superiority that she thought, being the littlest, people grew younger with wisdom. I wish it were true!


That's f-ing adorable. :D

User avatar
You, sir, name?
Posts: 6983
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2007 10:07 am UTC
Location: Chako Paul City
Contact:

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby You, sir, name? » Sun Aug 17, 2008 10:01 pm UTC

Maybe not so crackpottish, but it's a theory back from high school.

A few things had been bugging me:
  • The asymmetric funnel shape of space-time.
  • The absence of anti-matter.
  • The forward "time-momentum" of matter.

So, I put these things together into a theory about the geometry about the universe. I figured the universe was time-symmetric, that is, big bang created two "funnels" of spacetime. One with mostly matter and positive time-momentum, and one with mostly anti-matter and negative time-momentum.

This way, total energy would be zero, total time-momentum would be zero, and the universe would be pretty and symmetrical. The anomalies in gravitation commonly explained with dark energy could possibly also be explained somehow by gravity seeping over from the antiverse.

Image
I edit my posts a lot and sometimes the words wrong order words appear in sentences get messed up.

hitokiriilh
Posts: 244
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2007 9:15 pm UTC
Location: UVa
Contact:

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby hitokiriilh » Sun Aug 17, 2008 10:26 pm UTC

Clever. The last two are actually related if not the same since anti-matter is literally just matter propagating backwards in time (negative energy state solutions to the Dirac equation -> negative time component of the 4-momentum -> backwards in time). That funnel 'shape' is a consequence of the {-+++} signature of the space-time metric. It's actually very important - it kind of enforces causality. It is curious why it's that way though.

I like to thing the time-reversal asymmetry is a consequence of non-commutative behavior of time-like directions in space-time. Haven't done much in terms of formalizing that though. >.<

User avatar
4=5
Posts: 2073
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 3:02 am UTC

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby 4=5 » Sun Aug 17, 2008 10:30 pm UTC

You, sir, name? wrote:Maybe not so crackpottish, but it's a theory back from high school.

A few things had been bugging me:
  • The asymmetric funnel shape of space-time.
  • The absence of anti-matter.
  • The forward "time-momentum" of matter.

So, I put these things together into a theory about the geometry about the universe. I figured the universe was time-symmetric, that is, big bang created two "funnels" of spacetime. One with mostly matter and positive time-momentum, and one with mostly anti-matter and negative time-momentum.

This way, total energy would be zero, total time-momentum would be zero, and the universe would be pretty and symmetrical. The anomalies in gravitation commonly explained with dark energy could possibly also be explained somehow by gravity seeping over from the antiverse.

Image

you could try replacing the cones with a hyperbola shape and see what happens

User avatar
You, sir, name?
Posts: 6983
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2007 10:07 am UTC
Location: Chako Paul City
Contact:

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby You, sir, name? » Sun Aug 17, 2008 10:35 pm UTC

4=5 wrote:you could try replacing the cones with a hyperbola shape and see what happens


If you, from there, go from real space to complex space, things really become cool. ;)
I edit my posts a lot and sometimes the words wrong order words appear in sentences get messed up.

hitokiriilh
Posts: 244
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2007 9:15 pm UTC
Location: UVa
Contact:

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby hitokiriilh » Sun Aug 17, 2008 11:35 pm UTC

Not sure I get where you two are going with the hyperbola/complex plane stuff. o.o complex manifolds?

Also, in what reference frame is t=0 set? The 'cosmological rest frame' as it's usually taken in standard cosmological models?

User avatar
You, sir, name?
Posts: 6983
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2007 10:07 am UTC
Location: Chako Paul City
Contact:

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby You, sir, name? » Sun Aug 17, 2008 11:48 pm UTC

hitokiriilh wrote:Also, in what reference frame is t=0 set? The 'cosmological rest frame' as it's usually taken in standard cosmological models?


The frame is so that event 0 is in origin, and time flows along the t-axis.
I edit my posts a lot and sometimes the words wrong order words appear in sentences get messed up.

hitokiriilh
Posts: 244
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2007 9:15 pm UTC
Location: UVa
Contact:

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby hitokiriilh » Mon Aug 18, 2008 12:15 am UTC

You, sir, name? wrote:
hitokiriilh wrote:Also, in what reference frame is t=0 set? The 'cosmological rest frame' as it's usually taken in standard cosmological models?


The frame is so that event 0 is in origin, and time flows along the t-axis.


Hrmm, nevermind. I think I thought about it too much. All observers separated by a Lorentz boost agree on the coordinates for the origin. For non-zero values for time, different observers would disagree on where in space-time the coordinate refers to, but this is not the case for the origin. Soooo...yeah, ignore my silliness. :lol:

User avatar
ThinkerEmeritus
Posts: 416
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 11:32 pm UTC

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby ThinkerEmeritus » Mon Aug 18, 2008 12:33 am UTC

You, sir, name? wrote:Maybe not so crackpottish, but it's a theory back from high school.

A few things had been bugging me:
  • The asymmetric funnel shape of space-time.
  • The absence of anti-matter.
  • The forward "time-momentum" of matter.

So, I put these things together into a theory about the geometry about the universe. I figured the universe was time-symmetric, that is, big bang created two "funnels" of spacetime. One with mostly matter and positive time-momentum, and one with mostly anti-matter and negative time-momentum.

This way, total energy would be zero, total time-momentum would be zero, and the universe would be pretty and symmetrical. The anomalies in gravitation commonly explained with dark energy could possibly also be explained somehow by gravity seeping over from the antiverse.

Image

hitokiriilh wrote:Clever. The last two are actually related if not the same since anti-matter is literally just matter propagating backwards in time (negative energy state solutions to the Dirac equation -> negative time component of the 4-momentum -> backwards in time). That funnel 'shape' is a consequence of the {-+++} signature of the space-time metric. It's actually very important - it kind of enforces causality. It is curious why it's that way though.
<


It has the disadvantage that lepton number and baryon number are conserved everywhere but at t=0 [There are many antiparticles and few particles for t<0 and many particles but few antiparticles for t>0]. In my opinion, that is ugly; and in any event it is utterly untestable. It doesn't really lessen what is after all a purely aesthetic problem with the universe having more particles than antiparticles.
"An expert is a person who has already made all possible mistakes." -- paraphrase of a statement by Niels Bohr
Seen on a bumper sticker: "My other vehicle is a Krebs cycle".

User avatar
Willis888
Posts: 33
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 6:10 am UTC
Location: http://www.acorncommunity.org/
Contact:

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby Willis888 » Mon Aug 18, 2008 1:24 am UTC

ACU-LP wrote:This is awesome; proof that I'm not the only one!
. . .
I proposed therefore that mathematically there was an infinite chance that something could exist, an infinite number of times.
. . .
Now in hindsight (spelling?) I realise that you aren't really allowed to do arithmetic with infinity in mathematics. But still....?
Also, before it is mentioned; I know this is more philosophy than science, but I think it still counts.

As you can see....I'm not exactly normal (sane?) and had/have a lot of time on my hands.



I came to similar conclusions via a different path.

I remember sitting in a bathtub one night, when I was about 13, thinking about the implications of general relativity. I figured that if time stopped when I hit light speed, then if I were in a space ship traveling at light speed I would be in an infinite number of places at the same time. I took this to mean that I would be everywhere. Then I tried to imagine what that would look like, and realized that it would be a straight line through space and there would be an infinite number of places that I was not - I would still essentially be nowhere.

If I could be everywhere and nowhere at the same time, then they must be equivalent. That would mean that nothing and everything were also equivalent. That would mean that the seeming paradox of why anything exists is solved - nothing exists and therefore everything exists. Everything that could possibly happen has already happened an infinite number of times, is happening right now an infinite number of times, and will happen in the future an infinite number of times.

I later decided that the Many Worlds interpretation of quantum weirdness was close enough for me to feel vindicated.




poxic wrote:Just remembered a time/universe theory of my own (unfortunately, I can't blame this one on childhood, just altered states and unbridled creativity).

Multiple bazillions of universes exist, crisscrossing each other at all points through a bazillion dimensions. The track of your life is the trace your consciousness follows as it moves from one moment to the next, generally within the same bundle of very-similar universes.

If you try really, really hard to change your world, though, through positive thinking or transcendence or whathaveyou, you can edge your life-track over to slightly more distant universe-tracks and continue your life there, where things might be better. Or worse, if you push yourself through negative thinking and decadence.

It was a lovely hypothesis; however, it rather suffered from lack of observable evidence.

Edit: the edging of one's life-track to other uni-tracks depended on one changing one's vibrations/resonance/energy/thingummy to match that of the desired uni-track. Way way too New Age to ... confess to. :oops:


My adult theory is remarkably similar. Imagining yourself in a world different from your own alters your trajectory through the possible worlds such that you increase the probability of that difference becoming real. Religious and magical paraphernalia like crosses, pentacles, or Hebrew letters are mnemonic devices that are used to aid in the imagining of the world you are aiming for and to solidify your belief or faith that you'll get there (which apparently matters). Someone else has already written a more mathy explanation:

Now space has no preferred direction, so why does time appear to have one, i.e. forwards rather than sideways? I suggest that the minute size of our temporal horizon fools us here. If we existed as tiny blind organisms with only a single tactile sense organ and no means of detecting lateral acceleration, we would experience the world as a one dimensional line.


Go here, hit ctrl-f and type either "Cutting Edge Theory" to get to the beginning of the relevant article or "a TOE" to skip past the overview of why general relativity and quantum mechanics don't jive.

Even if it does turn out to be a load of nonsense, there are therapeutic benefits to training your mind to tightly monitor your thoughts and emotions.

And believing in magic is more fun than not believing in magic.

Image
/` \/ `\
\`<3`./
'.'~'.'
\/

User avatar
Cosmologicon
Posts: 1806
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:47 am UTC
Location: Cambridge MA USA
Contact:

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby Cosmologicon » Mon Aug 18, 2008 7:55 pm UTC

Not so much a theory as a misconception: I used to think that human generations were well-defined populations that people belonged to. I thought there were lots of people within a few years of my age, and lots of people within a few years of my parents' age, but very few people 10-15 years older than me, because their generation would be ambiguous. I wondered what it must have been like for them in school, these poor lonely inbetweeners.

I also designed (read: drew) a waterwheel that lifted enough water to power itself. I think that's a classic.

bushdayroses
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 3:37 pm UTC
Location: Notre Dame, IN

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby bushdayroses » Mon Aug 18, 2008 8:02 pm UTC

I always wondered if you could suspend a swimming pool above ground like water suspended in a straw with your thumb covering the top. I figured if you could create a low enough pressure in the tube above water, you could hold the water there and swim with your head upside down!
(of course, gravity played little role in pulling me out of the water)
gmalivuk wrote: A naked human will remain as scrumptious a meal as ever.

Jonolith wrote: Pineapples; God's way of saying "Just don't eat pineapples" :)

User avatar
danpilon54
Posts: 322
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2007 12:10 am UTC

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby danpilon54 » Mon Aug 18, 2008 9:09 pm UTC

I don't know about people, but Im sure the size of an animal has an effect on their experiencing of time. Imagine experience time like a human but living only for a day (fruitfly).
Mighty Jalapeno wrote:Well, I killed a homeless man. We can't all be good people.

User avatar
Platypodes
Posts: 218
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 8:42 am UTC
Location: On a knot on a log in a hole in the bottom of the sea

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby Platypodes » Tue Aug 19, 2008 8:52 am UTC

When I was four or so, I said that the sky was a big sheet of blue stuff with water on the other side and holes in the blue stuff for the rain to come through.

I kind of wish my mom hadn't disagreed with me at that point. The idea of infinity was scary for a four-year-old. :?
videogamesizzle wrote:so, uh, seen any good arbitrary, high numbers lately?

ACU-LP
Posts: 2826
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2008 12:39 pm UTC
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby ACU-LP » Wed Aug 20, 2008 9:07 am UTC

In contiuation of my ealier thing about the dragons and all that; I also theorised with a friend (who has an I.Q. above mensa! [he was out of my league in intelligence, but lacked near any common sense]) that dragons created "atlantis" and had similar problems to those we are having now, and hoped to destroy their city and its technology so as to prevent human technological expansion from over-reaching our understanding of the world, universe, morals etc. Yeah....we actually had nigh on infallable proof back then, but I cant find where we put all the evidence. We probably would have missed something vital anyway....but still.

xkcd references. Awesome, this thread gets better and better! More than 1500 views and more than 75 posts. *At the time of this posting*

I must find more of my theories....(yeah I didnt really have a very socially active childhood. Just me and the gang (a grand total of 3 inclusive)). It expanded over time and more theories were introduced by the others (who had had similar early childhoods) and the crackpot theories just kept coming.
I Am Raven wrote:Math is like a penis: it can be very satisfactory, but also a pain in the ass.
Red vs Blue wrote:Wash: That was the worst throw ever. Of all time.
Caboose: Not my fault. Someone put a wall in my way.

User avatar
wst
Posts: 2613
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2007 10:06 am UTC

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby wst » Wed Aug 20, 2008 4:15 pm UTC

ewige wrote:My 11-year old Theory: That we are all facets of a collective personality and that when we die, we return to this "ball of consciousness" which some facets of the personality of humanity called "heaven" and some called "hell" but they were the same place. The theory went on to explain all that nutty stuff like out of body experiences and past life memories and so forth.

hoo boy.

I did that. Only, i didn't go so far as hell or heaven, I just said that the idea of hell and heaven is bullshit, and there's just this ball of consciousness.
I even called it that. A ball of consciousness.
Anything I said pre-2014 that you want to quote me on, just run it past me to check I still agree with myself.

User avatar
Willis888
Posts: 33
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 6:10 am UTC
Location: http://www.acorncommunity.org/
Contact:

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby Willis888 » Wed Aug 20, 2008 5:53 pm UTC

ACU-LP wrote: . . . dragons created "atlantis" and had similar problems to those we are having now . . .


That is the plot and setting of the tabletop RPG "Mage: The Awakening".

I still wonder if something similar hasn't happened any number of times. What iteration of civilization are we on now? If it takes about 10,000 years to go from the discovery of agriculture to the brink of nuclear annihilation, and humankind is 200,000 years old . . . well it makes me wonder.
/` \/ `\
\`<3`./
'.'~'.'
\/

Matterwave1
Posts: 226
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2008 7:01 pm UTC

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby Matterwave1 » Wed Aug 20, 2008 7:11 pm UTC

I once thought u could make a lightsaber by using black to absorb light and white to reflect it back! :D I'm a genius! :P

Kesho
Posts: 73
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 12:30 am UTC
Location: The forested eastern coast of Oosah.

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby Kesho » Wed Aug 20, 2008 7:54 pm UTC

When I was younger, I was the type to believe in every whack-ass theory you could hand me: god, Bigfoot, Nessie, UFOs, Atlantis, Mu, ESP... All of it.
So, at age nine, I wrote up this grand little "theory," which explained in detail where Atlantis would currently be located. The whole thing was based on continental drift, and explained how the spread of the gap between the North American, Eurasian, and African plates could've sunk a continent. I actually managed to impress a few of the kids at my school with my bullshit, who thought I was a genius for it. Of course, at that school, another kid managed to convince his friends that he was royalty in Greece. I can't help but wonder if we were secretly and unconsciously competing for the right to be declared the biggest liar. :)

User avatar
Leah
Posts: 14
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 9:37 pm UTC
Location: Portsmouth, South England.
Contact:

Re: Childhood crackpot theories

Postby Leah » Wed Aug 20, 2008 10:06 pm UTC

When I was younger, I was secretly fascinated by cars. Now it's just less of a secret. Nobody ever told me anything about them, there was no need to. I somehow managed to "work out" how they worked all by myself when I was about 5. I was convinced that when you put fuel in, it ran round and round inside like a hamster on a wheel, which made the wheels turn. When it couldn't run any longer, it went to sleep so you had to put more in.


Return to “Science”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests