Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

"Vortex Based Mathematics by Marko Rodin"

page: 253
39
<< 250  251  252    254  255  256 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 10 2013 @ 12:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by LawrenceWippler

Originally posted by ImaFungi

Originally posted by LawrenceWippler

Originally posted by ImaFungi

Originally posted by LawrenceWippler

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by LawrenceWippler

But about his book, even though I haven't read it, it has all the well-known hallmarks of pseudoscience.

It's not a peer reviewed publication and it claims to not only come up with a theory of everything, but to do so by setting aside the existing theories and laws of physics:

The Theory of Everything, Solved

Setting aside the presently known theories and laws of physics and attacking the problem from a different perspective
It's Lawrence J. Wippler's credibility you should be questioning when he sets aside presently known laws of physics. The best someone could do is to come up with an alternate explanation for them...we can't really "set them aside" as they are pretty well established by experimental evidence.


If you have any questions pertaining to this theory please ask, it's not pseudoscience,


Thank you. How do you demonstrate that an alpha particle possesses the properties of a magnetic monopole? In terms of magnetic monopole characteristics, what's different between the alpha particle and the He3 nucleus?

The difference between the standard model and my theory is the underlying principal, the end results of all experiments remains the same. My theory uses only three particles and the law of attraction, and the standard model uses many elementary particles. Alpha and Beta particles (standard model) are actually short duration EM waves in the gamma region of the EM spectrum. The Alpha particle (standard model) is a wave composed only of north monopoles and Beta is composed of only south monopoles.


Are monopoles 3-d objects? what determines the difference between a south monopole and north monopole? do they have mass? how do they relate to the electron?
Are monopoles 3-d objects? Yes What determines the difference between a south monopole and north monopole? The law of attraction. Do they have mass? Yes
How do they relate to the electron? Electrons don't exist only n/s monopoles.


Ok, what is the law of attraction based on (is that related to charge?spin?intrinsic unexplainable quality?)

in a bar magnet, according to your theory, N and S poles are electrons "traveling? or exerting force" outside the magnet one way, and protons "traveling? or exerting force" the other way?
The law of attraction is based on magnetic charge.
The north pole of a bar magnet is a large concentration of north monopoles, and the south pole is a large concentration of south monopoles.


Isnt the material of the magnet composed throughout, of protons and electrons? and didnt you say electrons were one monopole and protons were the other monopole? if all the electrons go to one end, and all the protons go to the other, how does the magnet remain a stable configuration of atomic material?

"the law of attraction is based on magnetic charge" .. What is magnetic charge? what about the universe decides what bit of matter has what magnetic charge and what is the fundamental physical difference between the charges?




posted on Feb, 10 2013 @ 01:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by LawrenceWippler
If you have any questions pertaining to this theory please ask, it's not pseudoscience,

Thanks for allowing me to ask, but my question has already been asked and you haven't answered it:


Originally posted by buddhasystem
Thank you. How do you demonstrate that an alpha particle possesses the properties of a magnetic monopole?
This is a really important question. But I have yet to see it answered.

Alpha particles have been studied in considerable detail, and have not been determined to be magnetic monopoles. Yet Mr. Wippler claims that:


Originally posted by LawrenceWippler
The difference between the standard model and my theory is the underlying principal, the end results of all experiments remains the same.
How can this be the case if the end results of experiments done with alpha particles have shown a lack of magnetic monopole properties, yet you claim it does have such properties?



posted on Feb, 10 2013 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by LawrenceWippler
You continue to use particles from the standard model That don't exist, trying to answer a question using these particles is impossible.


Hmm, if you are telling me that electrons do not exist, and do not have the properties that have been carefully measured in the lab many times over, I find it just about as strange as a hypothesis that Domino Pizza does not exist, and Walmart is a figment of imagination. You can call the electron anything you want, for example in Japanese it actually sounds like "a little negative thing". The name doesn't matter, what we observe does. So what is EXACTLY that you are saying does not exist?

I also asked you about the alpha particle and its relation to helium-3. You are apparently very, very clueless about the very basic physics which you throw away with such ridiculously cavalier attitude. Never mind you are abusing the word "Standard Model", which is rather common for an ignoramus. Electrons, alpha particles and a plethora of other objects were studied in a fair amount of detail long before the Standard Model took shape. Their properties, measured quite reliably, are just that, OBSERVABLES. Which part of their observed parameters you are saying was measured wrong? Be specific.


the standard model explanation is based on the wrong model of the atom.


Standard Model does not deal with the structure of the atom, at least directly. It's explicitly a subatomic theory. Here, you just learned something today. Congratulations.


You should read the entire book this would help you in understanding of my simple theory.


So you are calling it "simple theory" once again, ad nauseam, and yet you cannot give a SIMPLE answer to a SIMPLE question. Funny, innit?

Because of your abject failure to answer a rather primitive question, and reviewing the pages of your book that I already spent time reading, I'm convinced that your mental capacity is not quite up to par to master particle physics, and very likely elementary physics as well. Therefore, I respectfully decline.



posted on Feb, 10 2013 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by DenyObfuscation
reply to post by LawrenceWippler
 



the standard model explanation is based on the wrong model of the atom.


What is the correct model for the atom? After you answer that as clearly as possible, please explain how you know this. Can you demonstrate your model?
Unable to post it here perhaps I can Email it to you.



posted on Feb, 10 2013 @ 02:29 PM
link   
I'm going to use another analogy... If you fill a pool, then turn around and set the drain open as water continues to pour in from rain fall, hose, etc., etc., what do these water molecules eventually pass through as they disappear from view?

Next, what would happen, if you were stuck in a whirlpool headed towards the drain?

Last but not least, let's say the pool was big enough to drop a standard jungle gym over the drain... Being an adult, would this prevent you from getting sucked directly into the drain?

Now what if the jungle gym was constructed in such a way to accelerate drainage. Would you not find more force exerted onto your body?

Key factors: Induction, lattice structure, kinetic energy.


Magnet: Accelerating 'drainage' of centripetal and centrifugal forces.





edit on 10-2-2013 by Americanist because: Note: Our universe is governed by an even larger scale. This leads to predominantly induction force during its rate of cycle.



posted on Feb, 10 2013 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by ImaFungi

Originally posted by LawrenceWippler

Originally posted by ImaFungi

Originally posted by LawrenceWippler

Originally posted by ImaFungi

Originally posted by LawrenceWippler

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by LawrenceWippler

But about his book, even though I haven't read it, it has all the well-known hallmarks of pseudoscience.

It's not a peer reviewed publication and it claims to not only come up with a theory of everything, but to do so by setting aside the existing theories and laws of physics:

The Theory of Everything, Solved

Setting aside the presently known theories and laws of physics and attacking the problem from a different perspective
It's Lawrence J. Wippler's credibility you should be questioning when he sets aside presently known laws of physics. The best someone could do is to come up with an alternate explanation for them...we can't really "set them aside" as they are pretty well established by experimental evidence.


If you have any questions pertaining to this theory please ask, it's not pseudoscience,


Thank you. How do you demonstrate that an alpha particle possesses the properties of a magnetic monopole? In terms of magnetic monopole characteristics, what's different between the alpha particle and the He3 nucleus?

The difference between the standard model and my theory is the underlying principal, the end results of all experiments remains the same. My theory uses only three particles and the law of attraction, and the standard model uses many elementary particles. Alpha and Beta particles (standard model) are actually short duration EM waves in the gamma region of the EM spectrum. The Alpha particle (standard model) is a wave composed only of north monopoles and Beta is composed of only south monopoles.


Are monopoles 3-d objects? what determines the difference between a south monopole and north monopole? do they have mass? how do they relate to the electron?
Are monopoles 3-d objects? Yes What determines the difference between a south monopole and north monopole? The law of attraction. Do they have mass? Yes
How do they relate to the electron? Electrons don't exist only n/s monopoles.


Ok, what is the law of attraction based on (is that related to charge?spin?intrinsic unexplainable quality?)

in a bar magnet, according to your theory, N and S poles are electrons "traveling? or exerting force" outside the magnet one way, and protons "traveling? or exerting force" the other way?
The law of attraction is based on magnetic charge.
The north pole of a bar magnet is a large concentration of north monopoles, and the south pole is a large concentration of south monopoles.


Isnt the material of the magnet composed throughout, of protons and electrons? and didnt you say electrons were one monopole and protons were the other monopole? if all the electrons go to one end, and all the protons go to the other, how does the magnet remain a stable configuration of atomic material?

"the law of attraction is based on magnetic charge" .. What is magnetic charge? what about the universe decides what bit of matter has what magnetic charge and what is the fundamental physical difference between the charges?
The standard model has mislabeled the n/s monopole as a proton and electron.
The magnet will remain stable due to the mutual attraction between n/s monopole.
All things in the universe are magnetic and will respond to a magnetic charge.



posted on Feb, 10 2013 @ 02:43 PM
link   
reply to post by LawrenceWippler
 


You'll need to peel back one more layer (single-vector) to make your theory fly.



posted on Feb, 10 2013 @ 02:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by LawrenceWippler
If you have any questions pertaining to this theory please ask, it's not pseudoscience,

Thanks for allowing me to ask, but my question has already been asked and you haven't answered it:


Originally posted by buddhasystem
Thank you. How do you demonstrate that an alpha particle possesses the properties of a magnetic monopole?
This is a really important question. But I have yet to see it answered.

Alpha particles have been studied in considerable detail, and have not been determined to be magnetic monopoles. Yet Mr. Wippler claims that:


Originally posted by LawrenceWippler
The difference between the standard model and my theory is the underlying principal, the end results of all experiments remains the same.
How can this be the case if the end results of experiments done with alpha particles have shown a lack of magnetic monopole properties, yet you claim it does have such properties?
Your question was answered using my theory, sorry you don't understand it. I would like to
post an excerpt here about how energy is transformed creating what the standard model calls Alpha particles however it will fit in this space any suggestions?



posted on Feb, 10 2013 @ 03:03 PM
link   
reply to post by LawrenceWippler
 



I would like to post an excerpt here about how energy is transformed creating what the standard model calls Alpha particles however it will fit in this space any suggestions?


Is it from this link? www.gsjournal.net...



posted on Feb, 10 2013 @ 03:14 PM
link   
reply to post by DenyObfuscation
 


Good job, DenyObfuscation!



posted on Feb, 10 2013 @ 03:16 PM
link   
reply to post by DenyObfuscation
 


That looks the same as what's on the website, though.



posted on Feb, 10 2013 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by LawrenceWippler
 


Make a YouTube video with a whiteboard and post it?



posted on Feb, 10 2013 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by LawrenceWippler
The standard model has mislabeled the n/s monopole as a proton and electron.
The magnet will remain stable due to the mutual attraction between n/s monopole.
All things in the universe are magnetic and will respond to a magnetic charge.


when do you expect your Nobel Prize?



posted on Feb, 10 2013 @ 03:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


They're only dished out by the powers that be to maintain the status quo.



posted on Feb, 10 2013 @ 03:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by LawrenceWippler
Your question was answered using my theory, sorry you don't understand it. I would like to
post an excerpt here about how energy is transformed creating what the standard model calls Alpha particles however it will fit in this space any suggestions?
Yes as long as you don't go completely wild, there is a way to cheat the space constraints. Since you're sharing the secrets of the universe with me, I guess I can share the secrets of ATS with you, but don't tell anybody, I don't think we are supposed to know about this "cheat".

Post a reply that does fit in the allowed space, and submit the reply. Then click the edit button and then there is no longer any restriction that I have found on how much you can post, however if you go crazy and post way too much a moderator might edit your post, so maybe keep it to less than 15,000 characters, that should be enough. Or, if you needed 20,000 characters you could do 2 posts of 10,000 characters each like that. You must complete all your edits within 2 hours of the original post, after that you're locked out.

Thanks for elaborating.



posted on Feb, 10 2013 @ 04:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


They're only dished out by the powers that be to maintain the status quo.


And here was me thinking the reasons why this wasn't being shouted from the rooftops in physics deaprtments as the most important discovery of the last 50 years was that there is no actual scientific merit in it.

I mean what with bucketloads of people in "mainstream" engaging in research in this very field I would have thought a well researched and repeatable experiment showing the effect would be a cinch for worldwide fame - even if some cranky old Scandenavians were grumpy about it!



posted on Feb, 10 2013 @ 04:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


The mainstream is the mainstream for a reason - they like things just the way they are. The free-thinkers are censored - except on the internet. After enough open-source R&D is done, things will change.

Keep arguing, though. Obviously you simply disagree. Different people have different world views.



posted on Feb, 10 2013 @ 04:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Americanist
I'm going to use another analogy... If you fill a pool, then turn around and set the drain open as water continues to pour in from rain fall, hose, etc., etc., what do these water molecules eventually pass through as they disappear from view?

Next, what would happen, if you were stuck in a whirlpool headed towards the drain?

Last but not least, let's say the pool was big enough to drop a standard jungle gym over the drain... Being an adult, would this prevent you from getting sucked directly into the drain?

Now what if the jungle gym was constructed in such a way to accelerate drainage. Would you not find more force exerted onto your body?

Key factors: Induction, lattice structure, kinetic energy.


Magnet: Accelerating 'drainage' of centripetal and centrifugal forces.





edit on 10-2-2013 by Americanist because: Note: Our universe is governed by an even larger scale. This leads to predominantly induction force during its rate of cycle.


That sounds cool...

so you explain magnetic attraction at a distance by, energy whirl pooling space-time, and (literally as big bang cosmologists say space-time expands) the whirlpools incrementally eliminate space between two magnets, thus connecting the magnets?

ive been trying to think of how magnets attract... and one analogy I thought of is it could be something like how if you are standing in a pool of water, and there is a tennis ball 5 feet in front of you that you cant reach,, you can create motion/suction/rip tide in the water and get that ball to come to you... I think magnetic attraction may be something like that... and perhaps gravity as well... a massive body like the sun creates a whrilpool (torus if you like) of space which we un escapingly ride like a wake or wave.... a black hole can then just be seen as another massive whirlpool of space time.. like a tornado or hurricane can be seen as a whirlpool of airs and energies and pressures..



posted on Feb, 10 2013 @ 04:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


The mainstream is the mainstream for a reason - they like things just the way they are. The free-thinkers are censored - except on the internet.



And that, of course, is why nothing was ever discovered before the internet existed.




posted on Feb, 10 2013 @ 05:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose
Different people have different world views.
The movement of a compass needle isn't a world view.

It's a verifiable, repeatable, scientific observation resulting from the Earth's magnetic field.

Einstein's Compass

When he was 5 years old and sick in bed, Hermann Einstein brought Albert a device that did stir his intellect. It was the first time he had seen a magnetic compass. He lay there shaking and twisting the odd contraption, certain he could fool it into pointing off in a new direction. But try as he might, the compass needle would always find its way back to pointing in the direction of magnetic north.
Even if you change your world view, that compass still seems to point the same way.





new topics




 
39
<< 250  251  252    254  255  256 >>

log in

join