Posts Tagged ‘Null Physics’

Null Cosmology and Supermassive Black Holes

Thursday, August 28th, 2008 by William Reynolds

Ahhh, tis Thursday and time for another installment of Schopenhauer Was Right. However, in its stead I want to very briefly address an epistemological concern I’ve been chewing on lately:  The abandoned treatment of essential purpose(s) in scientific method manifest in the treatment of supermassive black holes.

For the record, I must distinguish what I mean by essential purpose.  For example, it may be rightfully said that supermassive black holes cause the formation of spiral galaxies.  If may also be said that spiral galaxies cause the formation of supermassive black holes.  Neither of these statements address the essential purposes of supermassive black holes as vital constituents of spiral galaxies.  To be essential is to be purposeful – to be vital to the constitution of an existing whole.

In his book, Our Undiscovered Universe: Introducing Null Physics, Terence Witt outlines a cosmology based on his theory Null physics. His Null cosmology accounts for the purposes of supermassive black holes observed at the center of spiral galaxies. Indeed, by asking the question “Why are supermassive black holes at the center of spiral galaxies”, Mr. Witt reminds all of us that the universe is not superfluous in essence or purpose. Are there nonessential physical laws? Are there excesses of gravitational forces or electromagnetic currents upsetting the balance of our universe?

Terence Witt represents the general will of a number of thinkers who remain unsatisfied with the direction science has chosen in forsaking the essential purposes of things in order simply describe what things do and what they may do. We are reasonably confident in our understanding of black holes i.e. how they interact with matter and light. Additionally, we must similarly seek to understand the essential purpose of supermassive black holes. Or are we to believe supermassive black holes have no purpose in relation to the stellar and planetary swirl of a spiral galaxy?

[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]

OUR UNDISCOVERED UNIVERSE AUTHOR DEBUTS ONLINE WHITE PAPERS TO EXPAND ON NULL PHYSICS THEORY

Tuesday, August 12th, 2008 by Aridian PR

Author Terence Witt using internet to communicate extensions of his scientific theories.

The method of circulating scientific ideas is changing. With the increasing rate at which scientific discoveries are made in the 21st century, more and more scientists are publishing their scientific work online, allowing virtually instantaneous access to new discoveries by a worldwide audience. Author Terence Witt is also using the power of the internet to publish a series of predictions related to the cosmology of his newly released theory, Null Physics.

Most recently, Witt posted on his website, www.ourundiscovereduniverse.com , a white paper entitled “Vortical Motion of M31 .” This paper uses Null Cosmology to calculate the speed of the core-ward inflow of M31, the Andromeda galaxy, as 3.5 ± 0.7 km/s.

“This recent white paper is a prediction tied to Null Cosmology,” said Witt. “As Null Cosmology posits a galactic vortex at the center of all spiral and elliptical galaxies, predicting vortical motion creates a basis by which the theory can be validated or falsified.”

In addition to posting white papers online, Witt is submitting papers to peer-reviewed physics journals and is blogging once a week about diverse topics – everything from infinity and quantum reality to flying his plane through violent storm conditions.

For more on Null Cosmology, go to www.OurUndiscoveredUniverse.com .

About Terence Witt
Terence Witt is the founder and former CEO of Witt Biomedical Corporation. He holds a BSEE from Oregon State University and lives in Florida. Our Undiscovered Universe: Introducing Null Physics is his first book. To read more about Terence Witt and his latest breakthroughs go to OurUndiscoveredUniverse.com .

Victoria Lansdon
Public Relations Director
Aridian Publishing
(321) 773-3426
vlansdon@aridian.org

[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]

OURUNDISCOVEREDUNIVERSE.COM LAUNCHED AMID GROWING CONCERN ABOUT THE VALIDITY OF THE BIG BANG

Wednesday, July 9th, 2008 by Aridian PR

Terence Witt continues to garner high praise from readers of Our Undiscovered Universe and its criticism of current cosmological paradigms.

The launch of OurUndiscoveredUniverse.com has brought novices and career scientists together to discuss Null Physics cosmology. Cosmic paradigms that exist in the popular Big Bang theory are driving the need for discovery across the globe. Visitors to OurUndiscoveredUniverse.com , the My Discovered Universe (MDU) forum, and Terence Witt’s blog are finding further evidence to challenge popular opinion with testable results in a scientific setting.

Witt is not alone in statements that the Big Bang and other theories need to be reevaluated. The My Discovered Universe (MDU) forum has been buzzing with questions and discussions about Null Physics and other findings that may contradict, complement, or collide head-on with current cosmologies.

The push for answers is not just within the growing Null Physics community, but is also in conjunction with major cosmic findings that have shaken scientist beliefs. In 2007, a giant cold spot was discovered – a hole in the universe – which conflicts with established theories such as the Big Bang. According to the July/August 2008 issue of Science Illustrated, Lawrence Rudnick, an astronomer at the University of Minnesota and head of the astronomy team responsible for discovering the cold spot, believed that the finding would drive scientists’ to reevaluate the development of the structure of the universe.

As the Big Bang theory continues to deteriorate with scientists globally, author Terence Witt continues to call for answers. “If you tell me something that isn’t entirely evident or seems a little odd, I will be asking questions,” said Witt in his blog entitled “Skepticism .” “If you tell me the universe came from a primordial fireball 13.7 billion years ago, I’m going to keep asking questions until this story makes sense.”

In the book, Our Undiscovered Universe: Introducing Null Physics, Witt introduces Null Cosmology which is diametrically opposed to the Big Bang theory. Quickly gathering interest and supporters, Null Physics is changing beliefs if not opening the door for further discovery analysis.

“The way things were put [in Our Undiscovered Universe,] is very convincing,” said Professor Ivo van der Werff, “[it] has shaken my views and faith in Big Bang cosmology.”

OurUndiscoveredUniverse.com launched on July 1. Its forum, My Discovered Universe (MDU), is quickly becoming a popular place to discuss new cosmological ideas. With the website only eight days old, the MDU forum already boasts 41 members, almost 100 topics, and more than 520 posts.

Reevaluate your cosmology at www.OurUndiscoveredUniverse.com .

About Terence Witt
Terence Witt is the founder and former CEO of Witt Biomedical Corporation. He holds a BSEE from Oregon State University and lives in Florida. Our Undiscovered Universe: Introducing Null Physics is his first book. To read more about Terence Witt and his latest breakthroughs go to OurUndiscoveredUniverse.com .

Victoria Lansdon
Public Relations Director
Aridian Publishing
(321) 773-3426
vlansdon@aridian.org

[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]

Skepticism

Sunday, June 29th, 2008 by Terence Witt

I have a friend who’s a medical professional, but is incredibly skeptical about a wide variety of scientific topics, physics in particular. He doesn’t believe a word I tell him about anything to do with physics, from the equivalence between mass and energy to the power output of the sun. He doesn’t believe, for instance, that light is composed of photons. When I press onward, trying to establish a baseline of mutual understanding between us, digging for a common denominator, he will eventually relent that “of course the moon causes the tides!” or “of course the sun burns hydrogen!”, then look at me as if I’m an idiot. Yet this same person will believe the most ridiculous fishing anecdotes that you can possibly imagine. He’s a self-described skeptic, and for the life of me, I can never isolate the boundaries of his skepticism. But it is fun trying. Sometimes it’s difficult to resist the obvious temptation: “no, the sun actually burns coal…”.

During the course of releasing my book, which contains a number of new physics ideas, clouds of skepticism have enfolded me like a weather pattern. Remarks such as “I’m too skeptical to read something like that” or “I’m skeptical about anything that the scientists don’t agree with” are common. I’m left with the nagging suspicion that most skeptics don’t really know what it means to be a skeptic. Or, to quote the wonderful movie The Princess Bride, “I don’t think that word means what you think it means…”. The ‘skeptics’ that I’ve met seem to treat it like fashion, where they are free to choose, for no apparent reason, the subjects to which their skepticism can be liberally applied.

I am guilty of this as well, but I like to think that I reserve it for extreme examples. If I get an email from someone claiming to have been Werner Heisenberg’s confident, and who has secret knowledge of the inner workings of Area 51, I tend to be a little skeptical. If, however, someone thinks that they can produce a photovoltaic cell with an efficiency of 30%, I’ll listen for a while, trying to determine if what they say makes sense, regardless of their background. Skepticism is a powerful tool, but only if you use it for the purpose for which it was originally intended. It is not a shield that protects ignorance; it is a looking glass that promotes introspection. If what you believe can’t survive a few playful, penetrating questions, perhaps there’s something wrong with it. If there are topics that are, because of their nature, simply beyond question, or if you think consensus constitutes evidence and won’t ask questions if other people seem convinced, you might not be a skeptic after all. If you’re the only one in the room asking questions, you probably are a skeptic. True skeptics are a definite minority.

It is with no small amusement or irony that, by releasing my book, I’ve incurred the gestalt wraith of thousands of would-be ‘skeptics’ across the globe. The reason I wrote the book, after all, is because I am a skeptic. If you tell me something that isn’t entirely evident or seems a little odd, I will be asking questions. In some cases, lots and lots of questions. If you tell me the universe came from a primordial fireball 13.7 billion years ago, I’m going to keep asking questions until this story makes sense, and your answers don’t carry more weight just because you are the world’s leading cosmologist and believe in them with all your heart. Regardless of how artfully and strenuously we try to dodge the universe’s inevitable and immutable nature; regardless of how heroic our mathematics or strained our interpretations, logical consistency continues to matter, because it is the glue from which comprehension emerges. A lie told a thousand times might seem more believable than the truth, but only if you’re not a skeptic, and repetition doesn’t make it any truer.

So when the physicists tell you that the universe “doesn’t need to be rational” or “has nothing to do with common sense” or “your question is meaningless”, little bells should be going off in your head. I’m not saying that you need to treat modern cosmology like a scam, but it helps.

[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]

Our Undiscovered Universe Blog is proudly powered by WordPress
Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS).