Re: Is it our math letting us down?


David Thomson wrote:
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

The reasons many people dislike you here is because your model
doesn't accomodate Heinserberg Uncertainty Principle (HUP).
By denying HUP, you shatter Quantum Mechanics and
everything they hold dear. You believe neutron is made up of
proton and electron. This kills HUP. Remember too that the
entire QM and QFT foundation can be traced back to the time when
Bohr pondered how the electron move around the nucleus.
Succeeding discoveries by De_Broglie, Schroedinger, Born produced
wave mechanics and behavior of electrons. One of its powerful
consequences is the existence of HUP. Your model violates HUP.
Yet you don't give an alternative dynamics of the electrons movement
in the atoms or an alternative atomic model that doesn't use
HUP. This is the core of your model inconsistency. You
didn't accept HUP yet you didn't derive a new atomic model
of electrons behavior with regards to the nucleus. This is
why physicists are so mad about you. You talk about particle,
mass, spin, etc. yet you don't show how electrons move in
the atom without HUP. Note that because the electrons has wave
behavior. From Fourier, you can't localize the electron position
without increase in momentum. This is why the electron can't be
fitted into the diameter of a proton for lengthy period of time.
Therefore if you want to get physicists to get serious with you.
Either accomodate HUP and reject that neutron is made up
of bound proton/electron or produce a new atomic model of
how electrons dynamics in the vicinity of the nucleus without HUP.
Note that even though you describe subquantum mechanics
of what is underneath the electron. The behavior of the electron
in the nucleus still follow macroscopic properties such as wave
interactions etc. Gets?

Borne

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: New Cubic Atomic Model explains electron energy levels and bonding
    ... > attracted to an electron. ... > explained what is the force that keeps the electron and proton separate ... it is a simple fact that there are electrons in the atoms of the ... level, particles behave differently. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Video of cubic atomic model explains all
    ... around a proton, it should radiate energy and fall into the proton." ... proton and the electron going to explode or something? ... hydrogens. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: experimental verification of electromagnetic mass
    ... Tell me what communicates the movement of charge to the magnet and ... A free neutron decays in flight into a proton, an electron, ... >antiproton, a positron, and a neutrino. ...
    (sci.physics.particle)
  • Re: diameter of proton, neutron wrt electron
    ... Basically they are saying that only electron, proton, ... >> compound of other particles. ... >> quarks the new elementary particles instead of neutrons and ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Is it our math letting us down?
    ... detected as point particles in contrast to protons which ... and it also shows how the structure of the proton relates to the ... structures of the electron, positron, and antiproton. ... be interesting to see how my theory contradicts experimental data when ...
    (sci.physics)
Loading