Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online
0 registered (), 212 Guests and 2 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
recently I've been thinking about this video
by paul
Yesterday at 10:48 PM
Gravity Wheel ( SCIENCES VERSION )
by paul
Yesterday at 10:38 PM
Snow Cover Data aka Global Warming Data
by paul
Yesterday at 09:30 PM
does the forum work again?
by paul
Yesterday at 09:01 PM
Top Posters (30 Days)
paul 6
Topic Options
#14563 - 06/14/06 05:43 AM Interpretation
jhmar Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 05/25/06
Posts: 10
Loc: uk
I am working on a classical interpretation of experiments that shows how particles are created from nothing (vacuum force). It is not complete, but I hope there is sufficient for others to understand where I am heading and make some helpfull comments.
Please visit:
http://elasticity2.tripod.com/interpretation/

Top
.
#14564 - 06/15/06 01:38 PM Re: Interpretation
Anonymous
Unregistered


I couldnt read all ... but let me tell you .. your compression principle is wrong...
One of the most elemetary particle is as big as the Universe itself.

Top
#14565 - 06/15/06 09:19 PM Re: Interpretation
Anonymous
Unregistered


DKV:
Can you back up your statements with actual theory? Otherwise you are just posting to hear yourself talk and that is bad manners.

"Amaranth"

Top
#14566 - 06/16/06 05:34 AM Re: Interpretation
jhmar Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 05/25/06
Posts: 10
Loc: uk
Can you back up your statements with actual theory? Otherwise you are just posting to hear yourself talk and that is bad manners.

Please explain how you would define 'Theory'.
I have put forward two mathematical tables, one uses mass quantities found by experiment to define what determines mass, force and radii; then using the proposed radii I show how waves determine why particles occur in particlular quantities. This has never been done before.

The Standard Model does not have an interpretation , I show that my proposal has an interpretation.

I pointed out that my work is not complete, but the subject of interpretation is so vast, that it is unlikely to be completed in one article.

My proposal does not call for any change to Quantum Theory, rather it does those things that Quantum Theory cannot do. It does however, challenge what little interpretation of Quantum Theory that does exist by claiming that the allocation of fractional charge values to quarks is wrong. In doing so it provides the base that allows a full interpretation of Quantum Theory to be put in place.

My theory is backed up by the same experiments that back up Quantum Theory; but unlike Quantum Theory my theory gives an explanation of how and why.

Top
#14567 - 06/16/06 02:11 PM Re: Interpretation
Blacknad Offline
Superstar

Registered: 10/05/05
Posts: 901
Loc: Coventry, England
jhmar,

Please don't worry, Amaranth was referring to DKV, not you.

You would have to spend longer than a year posting incomprehensible statements based on a 'Tao of Physics' worldview to elicit that kind of response. And I suppose that is probably an insult to Fritjof Capra.

Blacknad.

Top



Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor
Facebook

We're on Facebook
Join Our Group

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.