[paul cotter]

Or one might say "bullshit beats brains".

[trevorjohnson32 (OP)]

BOOOOOOO!!!!!

[trevorjohnson32 (OP)]

cube nucleus, electric shell and magnetic field, retraction of shell, frequency, and conductivity. All of these and more make sense to the theory of temperature and stationary heat and connect. Just like music and comedy, creative science writing also will grow logically when you start from a solid base. That should be what makes a theory solid. Not building on anti aether.

[Bored chemist]

when you start from a solid base.

You haven't done that.
You just made up stuff.

[Kryptid]

BOOOOOOO!!!!!

Are you spamming? Keep in mind that is what got you banned the last time. To be perfectly honest, I haven't seen much difference between how you acted pre-ban and how you are acting now. You are still being immature when others disagree with you. You have complete control over your behavior. Please start acting like an adult.

You also didn't answer my question. What did you mean by "naked genius powerless troll friends"?

cube nucleus, electric shell and magnetic field, retraction of shell, frequency, and conductivity. All of these and more make sense to the theory of temperature and stationary heat and connect.

The current model of temperature is sufficient to explain what we observe.

That should be what makes a theory solid.

What makes a theory solid is both its ability to be tested and the evidence gathered through those very tests. Do you have tests and evidence for your model? More importantly, how is the existing model insufficient?

Not building on anti aether.

Aether was discarded because there is no evidence for its existence. Aether is not even remotely necessary to explain how heat, the nucleus or nuclear fusion work.

[trevorjohnson32 (OP)]

why don't you guys come up with something to work on?!? all you do is bitch.

[Kryptid]

why don't you guys come up with something to work on?!? all you do is bitch.

Critiquing your ideas is completely in line with the purpose of this forum. If you don't like being critiqued, then you're not in the right place. You should know, based on past experience, that we are going to correct you when you say something that goes against the grain of the current state of scientific evidence. With that in mind, why did you want us to un-ban you so that you could come back and face the same kind of push-back that you got before? Did you think that we would discard current scientific theory in favor of a model for which you cannot offer evidence? Why?

[trevorjohnson32 (OP)]

why don't you guys come up with something to work on?!? all you do is bitch.

Critiquing your ideas is completely in line with the purpose of this forum. If you don't like being critiqued, then you're not in the right place. You should know, based on past experience, that we are going to correct you when you say something that goes against the grain of the current state of scientific evidence. With that in mind, why did you want us to un-ban you so that you could come back and face the same kind of push-back that you got before? Did you think that we would discard current scientific theory in favor of a model for which you cannot offer evidence? Why?

Its funny that we agree we 100% see it our own way and not the other. But I seriously wasn't born yesterday and know when something is unknown in science, there's no way in hell I'm bending for you just the same as you for me! haha

[Kryptid]

Its funny that we agree we 100% see it our own way and not the other.

So why are you pushing for something that doesn't have evidence?

But I seriously wasn't born yesterday and know when something is unknown in science

Such as?

there's no way in hell I'm bending for you just the same as you for me! haha

The reason I'm not "bending" for you is because (1) you can't back up your assertions with evidence, and (2) the current models we have do have evidence. Please don't try to frame this as a mere difference of opinion. It's not. One side has evidence and the other doesn't.

[Bored chemist]

why don't you guys come up with something to work on?

There are essentially two things we could come up with
(1) the problems with your idea and
(2) a better idea.

And we have done both.

But I seriously wasn't born yesterday and know when something is unknown in science,

No, you plainly do not.

[alancalverd]

why don't you guys come up with something to work on?

More than happy to try. What's the problem for which you need a solution?

[trevorjohnson32 (OP)]

Huh, I guess when you get off on the wrong foot, with particle physics and dismissing the aether in 1905, this is what happens readers.

[Bored chemist]

Huh, I guess when you get off on the wrong foot, with particle physics and dismissing the aether in 1905, this is what happens readers.

The evidence dismissed the aether.
Albert A. Michelson and Edward W. Morley  went looking for it but were surprised to find it wasn't there.

That's it.
End of story.

[Kryptid]

Huh, I guess when you get off on the wrong foot, with particle physics and dismissing the aether in 1905, this is what happens readers.

In what sense have we gotten off on the wrong foot?

[alancalverd]

Particle physics and abandoning the aether were the answers to questions that classical mechanics couldn't solve.

Sadly, I recall writing that same sentence in another science chatroom about 20 years ago!

[trevorjohnson32 (OP)]

So the shell around the nucleus is composed of electricity not spinning electrons. Electricity is not made up of particles called electrons.

[pzkpfw]

It'd be nice to see posts composed of sense.

[trevorjohnson32 (OP)]

You seem to be ignoring teh fact that the Aether wasn't "forgotten".
It was discarded because of empirical evidence.

If light was discredited as travelling along the aether, why would making it a particle and not a wave change the expectations of M&M? or is it just simply overlooked that a photon would experience the same change in momentum that was predicted by M&M?

[Kryptid]

So the shell around the nucleus is composed of electricity not spinning electrons. Electricity is not made up of particles called electrons.

We very much have evidence that atoms contain particles called electrons. Have you read up on the history of the electron?

You seem to be ignoring teh fact that the Aether wasn't "forgotten".
It was discarded because of empirical evidence.

If light was discredited as travelling along the aether, why would making it a particle and not a wave change the expectations of M&M? or is it just simply overlooked that a photon would experience the same change in momentum that was predicted by M&M?

Photons can be waves as well as particles. What the M&M experiment ruled out was a non-relativistic aether. There could, in principle, be a relativistic aether (one of the tenets of Lorentz aether theory). However, that would make the aether undetectable. If it is undetectable, and relativity doesn't need it to explain the behavior of light, then there is no need to invoke it as an explanation.

There is no good evidence for the aether. If you disagree, then please post that evidence (and make sure it isn't CGI before you do).

[trevorjohnson32 (OP)]

Photons can be waves as well as particles. What the M&M experiment ruled out was a non-relativistic aether. There could, in principle, be a relativistic aether (one of the tenets of Lorentz aether theory). However, that would make the aether undetectable. If it is undetectable, and relativity doesn't need it to explain the behavior of light, then there is no need to invoke it as an explanation.

An undetectable aether? Your understanding of my question is off. I don't really care about studying the history of these things, or what they've grown into. It offends me. I'm offended right now while you sit there smug as a person can be? Is this seriously my problem? I know your team of naked g-s's are going to pounce again. I'm already offended? I hate that intelligent people are collected from birth to keep this crap wheel institution togather!?! Highly offensive IMO and does evil unto man's heart. Oh well its been four weeks, not a lot else to add at the moment. Go offend someone else with your 'empirical' knowledge on these subjects. Don't waste my time anymore please and thank you.