The World's Largest Coalition of Nontheists and Nontheist Communities!

# Fundamental Theory Of Existence.

http://sagargorijala.blogspot.com/

Fundamental Theory Of Existence.

1. Zero can not exist as denominator.

2. Anything can not be created out of nothingness, only change of form is possible and change is everywhere.

3. Anything can not be destroyed into nothingness, only change of form is possible and change is everywhere.

4. Existence of anything can not be infinite.

5. There is no beginning and an end to the existence of the World.

6. There are finite absolute laws.

7. Velocity of light is relative.

8. There are three dimensions and three dimensions only.

9. Time Travel is impossible.

10. Tan 90 can not exist.

11. God(s) can not exist.

Let us take XY=1 to prove first postulate. XY=1 is equation for Rectangular or Equilateral Hyperbola. Using XY=1 we can understand that neither X nor Y can ever equal zero and if X and or Y equals zero we get 1=0 which is incorrect. Therefore X and or Y can not be equal to zero. This means division with zero is not possible. When we take 8/4 we get 2. What it means is dividing 8 into 4 parts and you get 2 sets of 4 each. What does 8/0 mean? 8/0 means dividing 8 into 0 parts, it means 8 Apples cease to exist. When we eat 8 Apples they no longer exist as Apples but they exist as some other product, change of form. But, 8/0 means 8 Apples no longer exist, in any form. So, division with 0 is not possible. 8/0 means dividing or destrpying 8 Apples into nothingness. Then what does 0/0 mean? Division with 0 is not possible. So 0/0 is not possible. If 0/0 has an answer then we get anything=anything such as 1=0, 2=3, etc; But, how? Here is why 0/0 is not acceptable. If 0/0=0 then we get anything=anything… Proof 0X3=0X4 (0/0)X3=4
0=4?
Therefore 0/0 is not possible. Numerator divided by 0 is not possible. If we can divide an Apple into Zero parts then it means Total Destruction of an Apple into Nothingness. It means Total Destruction but division with zero is not possible and that leaves us with the first three postulates.
The fourth postulate says physical existence of anything can not be infinite. Numbers are infinite but numbers do not have physical existence. Infinite is the opposite of finite. Any number is finite. Infinite can not be a number. Number of Apples, Physical Existence of Apples can not be Infinite. Creation and destruction are impossible, our World was not created and can not be destroyed. It has no beginning and no end. If 8=0 then creation is possible and World can have a beginning but, it is not true. So, there is no beginning and no end to the Existence of our World.
Where Albert Einstein went wrong... Proof of Velocity of Light being Relative to Gravity.
Albert Einstein in his Special Theory of Relativity said that Velocity of Light is Constant in Free Space. That is, Velocity of Light is Constant on the Surface of the Earth or on the Surface of the Moon. But, it's not so. I beg to differ on it and here is my explanation.
Ordinary body is measured in terms of MASS.
Total Energy is equal to the Sum of Kinetic Energy and Potential Energy.
For ordinary body
Gravity is Directly Proportional to Change in Velocity per Time.
Velocity of Light is constant when it is measured on the surface of the Earth i.e; it's Constant where ever there is No Considerable Change in Gravity.
What happens when the Velocity of the Same Light ( Same Source, Same Conditions - Except Gravity ) is measured on the Surface of the Earth and on the Surface of the Moon?
According to Albert Einstein it must be Constant. But, I beg to differ. It's not constant and here is why?!
For ordinary body we have " MASS " but when it comes to
LIGHT we have " ENERGY/MASS " since Energy = Product of Mass and Velocity Square. E=m c(square).
P.E=mgh
P.E is Directly Proportional to mgh
m mass
g gravity
h height or distance travelled
P.E/m is proportional to gh
where h=vt
P.E/mvt proportional to g
For ordinary body
g is proportional to v/t
For Light
g is proportional to E/mvt, since Light is a form of energy with mass
Let's take t ( Time ) as constant.
So when it's ordinary body...
1. Gravity is directly proportional to Change in Velocity.
But, when we take Light into account...
2. Gravity is inversely proportional to Velocity [ Gravity is proportional to E/mv i.e; Change in Gravity leads to Change in Velocity of Light ]. As gravity increases velocity of light decreases and when gravity is lesser then the velocity of light is more when compared to a location where gravity is more...
So, Velocity of Light on Earth is lesser than Velocity of Light on Moon.
For ordinary body
Gravity is directly proportional to Velocity ( When Gravity increases Velocity increases... For example: You jump on Moon you takes " X " Seconds to reach the ground and you jump on Earth you take " Y " Seconds and " Y is greater then X "... ) and
when it comes to Light
Gravity is inversely proportional to Velocity. Since Light is a product of both Energy and Mass unlike an ordinary body which is a product of Mass alone.
So, as Gravity increases Velocity of Light decreases.
So velocity of Light is more in space ( where there is little gravity ) and on the Moon ( where the Gravity is lesser than that on the Earth ) when compared to Velocity of Light on Earth.
7. Velocity of light is relative.

Please visit

sagargorijala.blogspot.com

before you can say something is wrong!

Views: 204

### Replies to This Discussion

This is not how we do science. But as far as the timecube link goes, I wish it was.

I get that it's mental and that's it's thing. But did we have to say minus one squared is itself? It makes me nauseous and surely there a better way?

If the velocity of light is relative, why do observations made from different relative velocities return the same value for the speed of light?

Also, if something cannot be created from nothing and nothing cannot be created from something, then reality is entirely causal, meaning any effect must have a cause. But what about the whole of existence itself? Did it arise uncaused? What made existence exist? Why not non-existence? And if it was just always here, then where did the impetus for its momentum come from? Why is anything moving if it was not moved? That would defy the principal of causality.

## Support Atheist Nexus

Nexus on Social Media:

## Latest Activity

Hector Ed Autry, Lynn Monaghan and Karina A. de Lovo joined Atheist Nexus
11 minutes ago
1 hour ago
1 hour ago
Ruth Anthony-Gardner posted a discussion

### Charity Status for Dark Money Groups

1 hour ago
tom sarbeck posted a discussion

### Which of Homo Sapiens' Problems Are Being Addressed Emotionally; Which Are Being Addressed Rationally?

4 hours ago

© 2016   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by