Re: Is it our math letting us down?
- From: "David Thomson" <google@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 11 Feb 2006 07:11:14 -0800
Borne wrote:
Well. Your electorn and positron has the same string of mass
movement in your 8 figure something. How come they are
detected as point particles in contrast to protons which
has multiple parts inside?
A point particle has a Bohr radius and Classical radius? I think you
meant to say, "how come they are *calculated* as point particles?" My
answer to that question is because scientists weren't smart enough to
figure out the geometrical structure of the electron once they ignored
the existence of Aether.
My theory predicts the weak interaction, its value, and describes its
complete mechanics as well as unifies the weak force with
electrostatic, strong, and gravitational forces. If Weinberg was a
"genius to the extreme" for calculating a little value in an ununified
theory, how does my discovery rate? My theory also produces a
quantifiable structure of the proton that agrees with all observable
data, and it also shows how the structure of the proton relates to the
structures of the electron, positron, and antiproton. How does that
rate? And this is just the beginning of what my theory will do. My
theory also proposes a Casimir like equation that applies to the proton
and demonstrates that the Casimir equation applies specifically to the
electron. My theory also predicts that matter and antimatter are
gravitationally repulsive. And much more. If Weinberg was a genius
for one tiny little discovery, whereas my theory completely unifies all
of physics, what does that say about how much attention my theory
should be receiving?
There are so many faults in your model and contradictions to
experimental data. I'll write a separate message to it later.
I have stuff to do first.
When you have the time, I would like to hear your critiques. It will
be interesting to see how my theory contradicts experimental data when
it was derived directly from the experimental data.
Dave
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Is it our math letting us down?
- From: Borne
- Re: Is it our math letting us down?
- References:
- Is it our math letting us down?
- From: MuDeltaKappa
- Re: Is it our math letting us down?
- From: Eric Gisse
- Re: Is it our math letting us down?
- From: David Thomson
- Re: Is it our math letting us down?
- From: Eric Gisse
- Re: Is it our math letting us down?
- From: David Thomson
- Re: Is it our math letting us down?
- From: PD
- Re: Is it our math letting us down?
- From: David Thomson
- Re: Is it our math letting us down?
- From: PD
- Re: Is it our math letting us down?
- From: David Thomson
- Re: Is it our math letting us down?
- From: PD
- Re: Is it our math letting us down?
- From: David Thomson
- Re: Is it our math letting us down?
- From: Borne
- Re: Is it our math letting us down?
- From: David Thomson
- Re: Is it our math letting us down?
- From: Borne
- Is it our math letting us down?
- Prev by Date: Re: Is it our math letting us down?
- Next by Date: GTR gets a new life!!!!
- Previous by thread: Re: Is it our math letting us down?
- Next by thread: Re: Is it our math letting us down?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading