The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Does electricity explain everything?  (Read 2351 times)

Offline EllyDlight

  • First timers
  • *
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
Does electricity explain everything?
« on: 07/11/2014 21:38:01 »
I believe that fundamentally the universe is simple and easy to understand. All complexities are massive quantities of interacting basic particles.
The only particles necessary for understanding are electrons and positrons. Quarks are just made up by people.
So try on the thought of electrons and positrons being spinning magnets. A neutron then is a collection of an equal amount of electrons and positrons so that it creates a neutral net charge. A proton is a collection of electrons and positrons with one more positron than electron. Atomic structure is created because a neutron is diamagnetic when exposed to the magnetic fields of a proton and an electron. For every proton, it creates enough diamagnetic energy to float one electron near it. This is why electrons are a distance away from the nucleus and do not crash into protons. It is also why when more protons than neutrons exist in a nucleus, an electron does crash into it and a neutron is created. This will continue happening until a magnetic equilibrium is reached.
It makes sense that in space, a collection of these magnets in equilibrium could collide with other magnets to form structure like this everywhere. And then it is massive amounts of these interacting magnetic structures that create our reality.
Then simply, photons do not really exist. What we percieve as light is resonance of these magnets. Resonance travels through particles as waves. Sound travels through particles as waves. Light and sound differ only in frequency. Waves travel differently through different densities.
When you think about the universe as a tremendous amount of spinning, vibrating magnets it clears up a lot of questions.

Now we can think of the sun and stars as superconductors with super cold dense centers. Superconductors are what happens when a substance is perfectly diamagnetic. The protons the sun is constantly spewing out interact with gases and create plasma that explain all solar phenomena. Plasma then is just a state of matter that is so conductive that atomic structure has broken apart and all particles flow.

Then neutron stars are more dense stars and black holes are more dense neutron stars. The only reason we can't see a black hole is because the particles that make it up are not resonating at the frequency of light.

The matrix of the universe is held together by the magnetic fields of these ultra-dense collections of particles and all the interacting magnetic fields of all particles.

All universal phenomena is explainable through electricity and completely reproducable.

All of a sudden antigravity isn't so complicated. All that you need to do is displace the magnetic flux lines of the earth or whatever field you are in with a superconductor. If magnetic field lines are going around a superconductor, then all forces are going around the superconductor. This explains quantum locking.

People have been overcomplicating the universe by making up particles and names for forces that are just different instances of electromagnetism. I think it's time to concentrate on what we can observe.

It's more than likely that this idea has been thought of by people a long time ago and that classified technology has been created by understanding these concepts.

What I'm looking for is input and real life observations from other people to improve my own and humanity's understanding, especially relating to diamagnetic materials which I believe explains strong and weak nuclear force.

Thank you

note: This post is possibly repeated on other forums. This is because I'm looking for as much input as possible and I've found that other forums are banning me for creating this post. ??


 

Offline Atomic-S

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 928
  • Thanked: 18 times
    • View Profile
Re: Does electricity explain everything?
« Reply #1 on: 09/11/2014 08:30:50 »
There are a number of problems with this theory.  One is that it does not account for the discrete energy levels found in atoms.  It is unclear how it accounts for the double-slit experiment as pertains to electrons. It is unclear how it accounts for the energy-frequency relation observed when the cathode of a phototube is illuminated by different wavelengths of light. It gives no clue as to the relationships between time, space, and gravity. It also does not explain why we see the various less-well-known subatomic particles having the properties that we do. It does not seem to account for the way the number of neutrons relates to the number of protons in elements of different atomic weight. It seems to show us no insight into the Casimir Effect. 
 

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3921
  • Thanked: 53 times
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
Re: Does electricity explain everything?
« Reply #2 on: 09/11/2014 17:43:10 »
So what about electron positron annihilation? Do you actually understand what you are saying here? Do you understand the difference between elementary particles and composite particles? Black body radiation? The wave equation? Are your eyes glazing over yet?
 

Offline acsinuk

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 236
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • View Profile
    • electricmagnofluxuniverse.blogspot.com
Re: Does electricity explain everything?
« Reply #3 on: 10/11/2014 14:12:46 »
Ellyn
You are correct that the universe is basically dependant on electricity.  Physicists are however correct in their work on particles and DC electrics and chemistry which depend on electric charge.  The problem is understanding the massless 3D electro-magnetics and how magnetising stars in a galaxy will  induce a  black hole magnetic hub at its centre.    CliveS
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8667
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
Re: Does electricity explain everything?
« Reply #4 on: 10/11/2014 15:45:55 »
I believe that fundamentally the universe is simple and easy to understand....The only particles necessary for understanding are electrons and positrons. Quarks are just made up by people.
 ...

note: This post is possibly repeated on other forums. This is because I'm looking for as much input as possible and I've found that other forums are banning me for creating this post. ??

I strongly suspect that you have been banned elsewhere because you ignored the evidence when people explained why you are wrong, and carried on preaching.
So, given that it has already been explained to you that you are wrong why do you still say
"I believe that fundamentally the universe is simple and easy to understand... The only particles necessary for understanding are electrons and positrons. Quarks are just made up by people."

 

Offline PmbPhy

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2762
  • Thanked: 38 times
    • View Profile
Re: Does electricity explain everything?
« Reply #5 on: 14/11/2014 04:32:52 »
Quote from: EllyDlight
The only particles necessary for understanding are electrons and positrons. Quarks are just made up by people.
That's quite wrong. The Standard Model was created in order to be able to describe everything that is observed in nature. So you're wrong in your assumption that we only need electrons and positrons. For example you neglected photons and neutrinos. Without photons we'd be unable to see. When atoms transition from one quantum state to another with a lower energy it releases a photon. This allows energy to be conserved since the atom has a lower energy state in the final quantum state.

In 1930 a problem arose regarding beta decay. In beta decay a radioactive nucleus A is transformed into a slightly lighter nucleus B, with the emission of an electron.

A -> B + e-[/sup

Conservation of charge requires that B carry one more of positive charge than A. When experiments are done in the center-of-mass frame. Conservation of energy dictates that the electron energy is

E = [(m2A - m2B - m2e)/2mA]c2

When experiments were done it was found that the emitted electrons vary considerably in energy. The value given by this equation is found to give only the maximum electron energy, for a particular beta-process decay.  To explain this result Wolfgang Pauli proposed that there was another particle release during this process which was later called the neutrino. In the following year Enrico Fermi presented a theory of beta decay which incorporated Pauli's particle. It was so successful that it had to be taken seriously.

That's the reason that another particle is required to explain everything.

Quote from: EllyDlight
Quarks are just made up by people.
That is also incorrect. There is a great deal of evidence that they are very real particles which exist inside all hadrons. E.g. just because quarks are stuck inside hadrons it doesn't mean they are inaccessible to experimental study. Rutherford probed inside the atom by firing alpha particles (ionized helium atoms) into a thin sheet of gold. By analyzing the scattering of the alpha particles one can deduce the structure of the atom as most of the positive charge being concentrated at the center and the negative charge being diffused throughout the atom.

One can probe inside the proton in much the same way using what's called deep inelastic scattering. This was done using an electron beam in the late sixties. Most of the particles passed right through, whereas a small number bounced right back sharply. This means that the charge of the proton is concentrated in small lumps, just as Rutherford's results indicated that the positive charge in an atom is concentrated at the nucleus. However, in the case of the proton the evidence suggests three lumps, instead of one.

Quote from: EllyDlight
So try on the thought of electrons and positrons being spinning magnets.
That model also fails since the electron has been found to not have any substructure whatsoever. There's no classical model which can explain the electron as being spinning magnets. Even in classical EM that'd make no sense.

Quote from: EllyDlight
A neutron then is a collection of an equal amount of electrons and positrons so that it creates a neutral net charge.
That's also not true. It would require confining electrons and protons within a region of space the size of the neutron and that's found not to be true. Energy conditions forbid it as does the Heisenberg Uncertainty Relationship

Quote from: EllyDlight
A proton is a collection of electrons and positrons with one more positron than electron.
This is also wrong for the reasons outlined above. It simply doesn't correspond to experimental observations.

Quote from: EllyDlight
Atomic structure is created because a neutron is diamagnetic when exposed to the magnetic fields of a proton and an electron. For every proton, it creates enough diamagnetic energy to float one electron near it.
I've left it off here for the same reason as those above. All you're doing is making claims and not backing them up with any justification. That's not the way that physics works.
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Re: Does electricity explain everything?
« Reply #5 on: 14/11/2014 04:32:52 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums
 
Login
Login with username, password and session length