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: glird on 6 May 2010 12:24 On Apr 26, 6:24 pm, "Robert L. Oldershaw" <rlolders...(a)amherst.edu> wrote: > On Apr 26, 2:22 pm, glird <gl...(a)aol.com> wrote: > > A new paradigm already exists. The trouble is that nobody, other > > than its sire, is willing or able to consider the merits of anything > > that disagrees with the old one embedded in their mind. > Sad, but true. However, while that is the situation now, who knows > what the situation might be in the not-too-distant future? The > Ptolemaic paradigm eventually collapsed under the weight of its own > ungainly artificiality. I predict the same will eventually happen to > the substandard paradigm, starting with the just-so story known as > Quantum Chromodynamics, which is the weakest link of the substandard > model. The trouble with the present paradigm began with the Ancient Greek Philosophers' secret answer "No" to the unasked question "Is matter compressible". THAT is the reason they created the theory that Matter is made of particles traveling in an otherwise empty space. Although atoms do exist and are particles, they are made of the same kind of COMPRESSIBLE matter that fills each of them and the spaces between them too. Accordingly, the strongest link in the present paradigm, the kinetic atomic theory, is itself the "weakest link" of all present models. Once that is known, it becomes rather easy to work out the mechanisms of gravity, light, quanta, and everything else that exists in the universe. glird
From: mpc755 on 6 May 2010 12:32 On May 6, 12:24 pm, glird <gl...(a)aol.com> wrote: > On Apr 26, 6:24 pm, "Robert L. Oldershaw" <rlolders...(a)amherst.edu> > wrote: > > > On Apr 26, 2:22 pm, glird <gl...(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > A new paradigm already exists. The trouble is that nobody, other > > > than its sire, is willing or able to consider the merits of anything > > > that disagrees with the old one embedded in their mind. > > Sad, but true. However, while that is the situation now, who knows > > what the situation might be in the not-too-distant future? The > > Ptolemaic paradigm eventually collapsed under the weight of its own > > ungainly artificiality. I predict the same will eventually happen to > > the substandard paradigm, starting with the just-so story known as > > Quantum Chromodynamics, which is the weakest link of the substandard > > model. > > The trouble with the present paradigm began with > the Ancient Greek Philosophers' secret answer "No" > to the unasked question "Is matter compressible". > THAT is the reason they created the theory that Matter > is made of particles traveling in an otherwise empty space. > Although atoms do exist and are particles, they are made > of the same kind of COMPRESSIBLE matter that fills each > of them and the spaces between them too. > Accordingly, the strongest link in the present paradigm, > the kinetic atomic theory, is itself the "weakest link" of all > present models. > > Once that is known, it becomes rather easy to work out the > mechanisms of gravity, light, quanta, and everything else that > exists in the universe. > > glird Exactly. I think it is conceptually clearer to name the 'compressible' and to describe matter and aether as states of it. I have named it mæther. Matter is compressed mæther and aether is uncompressed mæther.
From: PD on 6 May 2010 14:06 On May 6, 11:32 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On May 6, 12:24 pm, glird <gl...(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > > > On Apr 26, 6:24 pm, "Robert L. Oldershaw" <rlolders...(a)amherst.edu> > > wrote: > > > > On Apr 26, 2:22 pm, glird <gl...(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > > A new paradigm already exists. The trouble is that nobody, other > > > > than its sire, is willing or able to consider the merits of anything > > > > that disagrees with the old one embedded in their mind. > > > Sad, but true. However, while that is the situation now, who knows > > > what the situation might be in the not-too-distant future? The > > > Ptolemaic paradigm eventually collapsed under the weight of its own > > > ungainly artificiality. I predict the same will eventually happen to > > > the substandard paradigm, starting with the just-so story known as > > > Quantum Chromodynamics, which is the weakest link of the substandard > > > model. > > > The trouble with the present paradigm began with > > the Ancient Greek Philosophers' secret answer "No" > > to the unasked question "Is matter compressible". > > THAT is the reason they created the theory that Matter > > is made of particles traveling in an otherwise empty space. > > Although atoms do exist and are particles, they are made > > of the same kind of COMPRESSIBLE matter that fills each > > of them and the spaces between them too. > > Accordingly, the strongest link in the present paradigm, > > the kinetic atomic theory, is itself the "weakest link" of all > > present models. > > > Once that is known, it becomes rather easy to work out the > > mechanisms of gravity, light, quanta, and everything else that > > exists in the universe. > > > glird > > Exactly. > > I think it is conceptually clearer to name the 'compressible' and to > describe matter and aether as states of it. I have named it mæther. > Matter is compressed mæther and aether is uncompressed mæther. Personally, I think it is conceptually clearer to name flatworms and nematodes as states of mæther. Flatworms are flat, living mæther, and nematodes are round, living mæther. It's simple, really. That's what makes it more correct, you know. PD
From: mpc755 on 7 May 2010 01:09 On May 6, 2:06 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On May 6, 11:32 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On May 6, 12:24 pm, glird <gl...(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > > On Apr 26, 6:24 pm, "Robert L. Oldershaw" <rlolders...(a)amherst.edu> > > > wrote: > > > > > On Apr 26, 2:22 pm, glird <gl...(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > > > A new paradigm already exists. The trouble is that nobody, other > > > > > than its sire, is willing or able to consider the merits of anything > > > > > that disagrees with the old one embedded in their mind. > > > > Sad, but true. However, while that is the situation now, who knows > > > > what the situation might be in the not-too-distant future? The > > > > Ptolemaic paradigm eventually collapsed under the weight of its own > > > > ungainly artificiality. I predict the same will eventually happen to > > > > the substandard paradigm, starting with the just-so story known as > > > > Quantum Chromodynamics, which is the weakest link of the substandard > > > > model. > > > > The trouble with the present paradigm began with > > > the Ancient Greek Philosophers' secret answer "No" > > > to the unasked question "Is matter compressible". > > > THAT is the reason they created the theory that Matter > > > is made of particles traveling in an otherwise empty space. > > > Although atoms do exist and are particles, they are made > > > of the same kind of COMPRESSIBLE matter that fills each > > > of them and the spaces between them too. > > > Accordingly, the strongest link in the present paradigm, > > > the kinetic atomic theory, is itself the "weakest link" of all > > > present models. > > > > Once that is known, it becomes rather easy to work out the > > > mechanisms of gravity, light, quanta, and everything else that > > > exists in the universe. > > > > glird > > > Exactly. > > > I think it is conceptually clearer to name the 'compressible' and to > > describe matter and aether as states of it. I have named it mæther. > > Matter is compressed mæther and aether is uncompressed mæther. > > Personally, I think it is conceptually clearer to name flatworms and > nematodes as states of mæther. You would.
From: Thomas Heger on 7 May 2010 01:12
glird schrieb: > On Apr 26, 6:24 pm, "Robert L. Oldershaw" <rlolders...(a)amherst.edu> > wrote: > >> On Apr 26, 2:22 pm, glird <gl...(a)aol.com> wrote: > >>> A new paradigm already exists. The trouble is that nobody, other >>> than its sire, is willing or able to consider the merits of anything >>> that disagrees with the old one embedded in their mind. > >> Sad, but true. However, while that is the situation now, who knows >> what the situation might be in the not-too-distant future? The >> Ptolemaic paradigm eventually collapsed under the weight of its own >> ungainly artificiality. I predict the same will eventually happen to >> the substandard paradigm, starting with the just-so story known as >> Quantum Chromodynamics, which is the weakest link of the substandard >> model. > > The trouble with the present paradigm began with > the Ancient Greek Philosophers' secret answer "No" > to the unasked question "Is matter compressible". > THAT is the reason they created the theory that Matter > is made of particles traveling in an otherwise empty space. > Although atoms do exist and are particles, they are made > of the same kind of COMPRESSIBLE matter that fills each > of them and the spaces between them too. > Accordingly, the strongest link in the present paradigm, > the kinetic atomic theory, is itself the "weakest link" of all > present models. > This model of particles, that fly around each other is not even very satisfying. It is totally illogic, because we had to attach a field to those entities and don't know how to do it to a point. Than we have no idea, where those things would stem from. The big-bang-nucleosynthesis is an explanation of the same ilk, that is fantastically illogic, too. Than we find wavelike features of such particles and have trouble to put that into little chunks of something. So waves are particles themselfs, what is somehow hard to believe, especially when they appear as virtual particles. So it goes on and on.. Greetings TH |