|
The suggestions youtube give me are rather varied...
I followed youtube pool a far while ago and still get suggestions although nothing for snooker which I was looking at back then.
I love pool mainly because it was an activity you could do at the pub plus I was making good pocket money from the pool comp and the after games where everyone would bet they could beat you after you had won the damn thing...but I agree its like chess ...I am really not a great shot but I can usually cover a pocket and put the white where they cant do much with it...I always laughed to myself when to ball would not go in and the audience would sigh thinking bad luck but I was always playing for a close miss...the duck in a row bang bang all over red rover.
I have a thing about waves...and my view is basically as outlined in the first post.
I know folk talk of radio wavrs etc but in my view it must come down to a flow of particles and the wave thing is merely humans attempt to quantify it...and gravity waves...mmm...I know I know space is bending etc but at a basic level there must be particles communicating what we interprete as waves...although I dont think GR folk like that approach...I still believe gravity is in effect a pressure from all the particles running around, Le Sages idea really to a degree, but GR seems reject the notion of a mechanical explanation...but information must, one could think, require something to carry it...I see the universe like a giant snooker table with balls (particles) rushing around and creating all the forces. ..I dont expect a Noble or recognition etc which is your typical crank but I do enjoy sitting and holding in my mind that big table we call the universe comptemplating where each (and every) ball will go .... also I dont think quantum physics need be mysterious ...all that is happening is humans can not firstly record all that is actually going on (they can only see some of the balls in my view) so they cant know where all the balls will go☺...also there seems a belief that random (notwithstanding the recognition I now point to) means not being able to determine outcomes while nevertheless recognising that probabilty plays its part...
Also it is my belief that at some level energy must be made up of descrete particles and we know that is teally swiming against the flow of current opinion.
I have been looking at Nikola Tesla and his countless extraordinary achievements..The man deserves a hundred fold the recognition he gets but he made the mistake of critisizing Dr Albert Einstein ..not so much him but the reliance upon maths I suppose was his beef..
Anyways how not to win friends and influence people...he is quited as saying " I dont care that they steal my ideas but I do care that they have none of their own"..I dont know the context but I suspect that would have upset everyone particularly those not steing his ideas.
From all I can tell he daw the universe in a similar fashion to me ..as to particles etc and I think he saw gravity as particle pressure and I even suspect he may have visialised energy as something discrete.
Anyways the Sun is shinning and I have so much to do and I have had my test so must get back to it..and progress is painfully slow so must work harder. I cant edit now bt will try later.
Alex
|