Proton Radius Cannot Be Derived From Standard Model
in [Physics]
|
Prev: "Fabrication" or "Lie" in the IPCC AR4 WGI
Next: Chapt 3, Fiberglass Experiment; using only luminosity for distance measure #62; ATOM TOTALITY
From: mpc755 on 26 May 2010 16:37 On May 26, 4:15 pm, spudnik <Space...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > it is important not to be gulled by various so-called paradoxes, > such as EPR, which are based on other paradoxes, > such as "the photon" in EPR. even the experimenters (and > theoretical propitiators) of EPR, do not say that information > can thereby surpass the speed of light; so, > what matter is this alleged paradox -- weren't EP&R really correct? > Yes, EP&R were correct. There is no instantaneous action at a distance. When a downgraded photon pair are created, in order for there to be conservation of momentum, the original photons momentum must be maintained. That is why detecting on photon means its pair will always be detected with the opposite spin. > so, how does a wave "propagate aethertronically" through the medium > of space, and what happens to the electrons in it?... hey, progress; > no need of either of Newton's balls! > > > > In this diagram of electron orbitals, which ones appear to you to be > > > "higher", and where is the extra space between the nucleus and a > > > higher electron orbital of which you speak? > > - The future determining the past > > - Virtual particles which exist out of nothing > > - Conservation of momentum does not apply to a downgraded photon pair > > My preferred concept of a photon is that it propagates as a wave > > through the aether (decompressed) and is detected as a quantum of > > mæther (compressed). The ability of the wave to be detected as a > > quantum of mæther occupies a very small region of the wave itself. > > By A.EINSTEINhttp://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/e_mc2.pdf > > "If a body gives off the energy L in the form of radiation, its mass > > diminishes by L/c2." > >
From: mpc755 on 26 May 2010 16:40 On May 26, 4:34 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On May 26, 1:30 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Explain how what you choose to believe occurs physically in nature: > > This is a good example of you having to be right rather than what is > right. You insist that nobody has something as right as you. You are > an hypocrite. > > Mitch Raemsch > This is my requiring questions and answers to be a two way street. Explain how what you choose to believe occurs physically in nature: - The future determining the past - Virtual particles which exist out of nothing - Conservation of momentum does not apply to a downgraded photon pair - A C-60 molecule can enter, travel through, and exit multiple slits simultaneously without requiring energy, releasing energy, or having a change in momentum. - Matter causes physical space to be 'unflat' but not move - Michelson's "aether displacement to the electric current" is different than Maxwell's displacement current - Mass is not conserved. The following are the most correct physical explanations to date: - A C-60 molecule enters and exits a single slit while the associate aether displacement wave enters and exits available slits - The aether displaced by the matter which are the plates extends past the other plate. The pressure exerted by the aether displaced by the plates forces the plates together - Conservation of momentum does apply to a downgraded photon pair. When a photon is detected its wave collapses which determines its spin. In order for the original photons momentum to be conserved, the downgraded photon pair have opposite angular momentums. - A C-60 molecule enters and exits a single slit while the associate aether displacement wave enters and exits available slits - Physical space is displaced by matter. Aether is displaced by matter. - Michelson's "aether displacement to the electric current" is the same conceptually as Maxwell's displacement current. - Matter and aether are different states of the same material. The material is mæther. Mæther has mass. Aether and matter have mass. Aether is uncompressed mæther and matter is compressed mæther. In E=mc^2, Energy is effect of matter transitioning to aether. Mass is conserved. My preferred concept of a photon is that it propagates as a wave through the aether (decompressed) and is detected as a quantum of mæther (compressed). The ability of the wave to be detected as a quantum of mæther occupies a very small region of the wave itself. In a double slit experiment the photon wave enters and exits both slits. The photon 'particle' enters and exits a single slit. The photon wave creates interference upon exiting the slits which alters the direction the photon 'particle' travels. Detecting the photon 'particle' causes decoherence of the photon wave and there is no interference. If detectors are placed at the exits to the slits the photon 'particle' is always detected exiting a single slit because the photon 'particle' always enters and exits a single slit. Mæther has mass. Aether and matter have mass. Aether and matter are different states of mæther. Aether is uncompressed mæther and matter is compressed mæther. 'DOES THE INERTIA OF A BODY DEPEND UPON ITS ENERGY-CONTENT? By A. EINSTEIN' http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/e_mc2.pdf "If a body gives off the energy L in the form of radiation, its mass diminishes by L/c2." The mass of the body does diminish, but the matter which no longer exists as part of the body has not vanished. It still exists, as aether. As the matter transitions to aether it expands in three dimensions. The effect this transition has on the surrounding aether and matter is energy. Mass does not convert to energy. Matter converts to aether. As the mæther transitions from matter to aether it increases in volume. The physical effect the increase in volume has on the neighboring matter and aether is energy. Mass is conserved.
From: BURT on 27 May 2010 17:57 On May 26, 1:40 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On May 26, 4:34 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > On May 26, 1:30 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Explain how what you choose to believe occurs physically in nature: > > > This is a good example of you having to be right rather than what is > > right. You insist that nobody has something as right as you. You are > > an hypocrite. > > > Mitch Raemsch > A wave proton is a three point energy time form that vibrates at two slow rates. As such all particles are infinitely small. They all vibrate slower in slower two-time. Mitch Raemsch
From: mpc755 on 28 May 2010 09:11 On May 27, 5:57 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On May 26, 1:40 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:> On May 26, 4:34 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On May 26, 1:30 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Explain how what you choose to believe occurs physically in nature: > > > > This is a good example of you having to be right rather than what is > > > right. You insist that nobody has something as right as you. You are > > > an hypocrite. > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > A wave proton is a three point energy time form that vibrates at two > slow rates. As such all particles are infinitely small. They all > vibrate slower in slower two-time. > > Mitch Raemsch "Wave proton". A moving proton has an associated wave. The proton particle enters and exits a single slit in a double slit experiment. The wave associated with the proton enters and exits both slits in a double slit experiment. The wave creates interference upon exiting the slits which alters the direction the proton particle travels. Detecting the proton particle causes decoherence of the associated wave (i.e turns the wave into chop) and there is no interference. A moving proton has an associated aether wave. A moving proton has an associated aether displacement wave.
From: spudnik on 28 May 2010 18:07
yeah (you meant), the pair of not-nessecarily-particulate-photons will have correlated polarizations. as for momentum, that is the profound nonsense of assuming that a quantum, called "photon," has to be a corpuscle -- and using an equation about the energy, that uses "momentum" (and thereby assumes a rest-mass). but, you'll never agree to that, and I am just a fool for trying to persuade. > Yes, EP&R were correct. There is no instantaneous action at a > distance. When a downgraded photon pair are created, in order for > there to be conservation of momentum, the original photons momentum > must be maintained. That is why detecting on photon means its pair > will always be detected with the opposite spin. thusNso: interesting thread; is one cycle of the wave, to be considered the wavelength and quantum of "photon?" note that the OP immediately falls to the typical linearization of the "wave" (in space), as with de Broglie's "guidewave" for the self- assumed particulate meaning of "photon;" cause that's what Einstein, thought at the time -- is it in the 1905 paper? there is certainly one place where a lightwave of pure frequency, looks like a sine-wave: in an oscilloscopic trace of a wire, or other "spacetime" referent -- Death to the lightconeheads; long-live Minkowski! > >> Like absolute zero, Planck offered a minimum distance. Which is > >> therefore a minimum wavelength. has anyone figured out what the > >> resulting maximum frequency mite be? > > Correct about maximum temperature, although I have no idea how hot or > > cold photons get. > E = hí thusNso: time isn't reversible, just because you can draw a "worldline" on a piece of "1+1dimensional paper;" that is just a kind of phase-space, strictly a mathematical fromalism a la hamiltonians & lagrangians. yes, phase-spaces in electronics e.g. might be formally "reversible," but, so, What?... you mean, like the "space-time flipbook" of Lawd Rees? thusNso: "retrodiction" of Bode's law for atoms? hey, Kepler was far more correct than is allowed, even though he only had the seven planets of astrology -- and, he was Court Astrologer. there was an article in *Fusion*, that had a formularium that worked for all of the planets, and all of the moons of all of the plants, as I recall. (of course, they/we are a bunch of platonists, anyway .-) thusNso: as Tim LocquaciousHand implies, "composition" of two rotations, one after the other, is not commutative, as the demonstration also can be modeled with quaternion multiplications; in any case, two rotations resolve into one, about a different axis. the question is, if you try to do them simultaneously, what happens? and, please, see if you can show it with quaternions, instead of this interminable blabfest; thank *you*. thusNso: Dear woould-be replacer of Jerry "no oil, except from Texas etc." Brown: no change from Jerry Brown's '69 "platform," eh? it is intolerably strange, insofar as we do need "fossilized fuels TM (sik)," to not get our share from our own "reserves." really, though, it is merely biomass, and the techniques have progressed since '69. Dubya's bro's ban offshore of Florida (and Louisiana) seemed like a tactical maneuver to support the oilcos' scarcity programme in our state. (why O why O why do folks believe, that the oilcos did not support the Kyoto Protoccol, which was just another cap'n'trade "free trade" nostrum, that Dubya'd have undoubtdely signed, if he had been told?) British Petroleum, the balls-out advocate of cap'n'trade, "Beyond Petroleum," is also the biggest company in the Alaska North Slope -- doesn't any body wonder, why no-one asked Palin about her BP-employed hubbie, and his Seccesionist ideals? one must take into consideration, with all of the hype about it, that oil comes out of the ground underwater in "seeps," under pressure. so, how much would come out, if BP et al ad vomitorium were not pumping like crazy? Waxman's current cap'n'trade bill just mandatorizes the huge, voluntary cap'n'trade since 2003 -- tens of billions in hedging per annum. what the Liberal Media (Ownwd by consWervative) don't talk about, is that he brought the first cap'n'trade bill in '91, under HW (who worked with Gore on the Kyoto cap'n'trade). what it amounts to, as Waxman basically admitted to, when he was at UCLA, is "let the arbitrageurs raise the price of energy, as much as they can in the 'free market' -- free beer, freedom!" a small, adjustable carbon tax would achieve the same ends -- as I even read "in passing" in a guest editorial in the WSUrinal, as well as from an "expert" in a UCLA seminar, but who said that it was (some how) "politically impossible" -- without being the Last Bailout of Wall Street (an the City of London). thusNso: I never read a word about Palin's hubbie's Seccesh "movement" in the Liberal Media (Owned by consWervatives) and that is sort-of the issue in AZ. I'm all for kids whose parents managed to sneak across the border & give birth, but I was taken aback by the "sense of entitlement" that the older kids have, about college (the DREAM Act; I stated to a group of them, that crossing the border is essentially a Mexican "rite of passage," and it is certainly not very dangerous as a proper hike, if you check the FAQs and maps & so forth from the Mexican goment (and those advocacy/ haven groups in the USA; it may be difficult in the summer, though). well, it's either that or college *in* Mexico, or you'll probably be made to join a gang. La Raza d'Atzlan are openly racist, not just by their title; at least, that's the impression that I got, attending one of their meetings at UCLA, two or three years ago -- it's in their God-am constitution. of course, teh real problem is "free trade," and this is already here to roost; the little spill in the Gulf is being used by British Petroleum -- which is also the #1 driller in the Alaska North Slope, that Ted Palin works for -- to create an "outsourcing" mandate to solve the problem, because we can't do it with our post-industrial cargo cult. well, iscrew that! read LaRouche, if you want to know the history with Lincoln and his "Spot Resolutions;" Cinco de Mayo should be a pan-american holiday! --Light: A History! http://wlym.com |