there is a new theory about a straight lines and parallel lines?

Question

in the whole universe there is no an identical proof or example which shows a behavior like "a straight line" and "parallel lines"

it is just a theory which never exists in reality. even one talks about a light's path, the path of light is also affected by the maganetic force. no single thing is scapeable outside the boundry.

Hence, In this whole universe the concept of a straight line and paraell lines obselete. we can't proof it mathematically and physically. if one says we can remove gravitational force or maganetic forces in the way of light, but this wont meet the actual "fact". a fact is fact which testified everywhere with same behavior and results

Answer 1

"There is a new theory about a straight lines and parallel lines?"
No. The things you are wondering about have been creating questions for a long, long time in mathematics and physics, mainly. Do you know anything about geodesic lines?
"in the whole... and "parallel lines"". Partially true -ehm...there is no "exact" definition for a straight line (except the convention related to derivatives), but know that "theory" originates from the verb "theorein =θεωρείν"=>to look at the divine=>to look at what is important, to examine, to contemplate. Scientists observe, and they observe what they first see. Straight lines are "seen" and are observed in certain point of space/time and under certain conditions -no need to object to what is seen so far, it is not that straight lines "really" exist.
"the actual "fact"... and results". Copying from wikipedia:
....In science a fact is an objective and verifiable observation, in contrast with a theory, which is a explanation of or interpretation of facts. Some scholars in the philosophy of science question whether scientific facts are truly objective or are always "theory-laden" to some degree. Thomas Kuhn and others as well pointed out that knowing what facts to measure, and how to measure them, requires some presupposition about the facts themselves.[citation needed] In the field of science studies, "scientific facts" are generally seen as entities which exist within complex social structures of trust, accreditation, institutions, and individual practices.[citation needed]...
A scientific law is a general and reasonably simple principle that is very well supported by evidence such as experimental results and observational data. The concept of a scientific law is closely related to the concept of a scientific theory. Typically scientific laws are more limited sets of rules for making predictions about the world than scientific theories...." The definition you use for "fact" has some basis, but is too generalizing, I believe. Remember that there is a difference between what is a "fact" and what we perceive as being "fact"/objective, but science depends on the observer's perception. It is also true that you are free to develop your own system of describing the world scientifically, if you can.
"...we can't proof it mathematically and physically..." Can you prove the opposite?
Go to wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ and search about the terms.

Answer 2

I think you're asking about the shape of the universe and whether or not Euclidian geometry applies. Current mainstream theories, supported by observational evidence, predict the universe is flat (Euclidian) so parallel lines don't converge or diverge.

Answer 3

next things i know you say there no black colour in this universe

Answer 4

Is there a question somewhere in there?