Naked Science Forum
On the Lighter Side => That CAN'T be true! => Topic started by: seeker3 on 27/03/2019 10:27:47
-
Professor, I think I discovered a new force, how do you think? Thanks
Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 5:51 PM
To: simonjon@uchicago.edu
Similar to universal gravitation force between matters, there is an
universal repulsion force between line of sight electrons on the
surface of matters. Without gravitation, we cannot orbit the Sun.
Without repulsion, Sun light cannot reach us.
Because electrons are on the surface of all matters, and because line
of sight electrons are constantly repelling each other with Coulomb's
force F=Ke x ee/R^2, therefore between the surfaces of matter A and
matter B there exists an universal repulsion force F=Ke x aebe/R^2. In
the equation, a is the number of line of sight electrons on the
surface of mater A, b is the number of line of sight electrons on the
surface of matter B, R is the average distance.
This universal repulsion force is always existing at any distance,
therefore line of sight electrons are constantly connected by this
force at any distance, therefore they can share their kinetic energy
instantaneously at any distance.
This universal repulsion force is the conductor of light energy in the
vacuum space between stars and planets. Light energy is instantly
shared between line of sight vibrating electrons on the surface of the
Sun and electrons on Earth outer atmosphere, then it becomes light
wave and traveling in the air at light speed C.
This universal repulsion force is the conductor of light between
things you see and your eyes. Due to air in between, light speed is C.
This universal repulsion force is the conductor of EM wave between
antenna and receiver. Due to air in between, EM wave speed is C.
Due to the existence of universal repulsion force, all star lights
reach Earth outer atmosphere instantly, become light wave traveling in
the air at speed C.
Sun light takes 8 minutes to reach us is mistaken. Time delay in space
communication is impossible.
If light speed in vacuum space is infinite, relativity,
electromagnetism and quantum physics will be all wrong.
Use MIT trillion frame per second camera to measure light speed inside
of a vacuum glass bottle, we can prove light speed in vacuum is
infinite.
Light only exists in air, water, medium/matter. There is no light in
vacuum space.
Energy instantly teleported from the Sun to Earth outer atmosphere.
Due to the existence of universal repulsion force between electrons on
the sun and our outer atmosphere.
Einstein and Newton thought light is something traveling through space
at light speed. It has both wave and particle properties.
They were both wrong.
-
Time delay in space
communication is impossible.
Yet we know for a fact that it happens. So that falsifies your assumptions.
-
"I asked top 500 physics professors a question, no one answered, why?"
Because there was so much wrong that they didn't know where to start.
-
MIT professors know less than you?
-
MIT professors know less than you?
No.
I also don't know where to start explaining just how wrong you are.
I suggest you work your way through the physics courses here
https://www.khanacademy.org/
-
The reason you haven't gotten any answers is that physics professors have better things to do with their time than to answer you just to point out how wrong your idea is, especially when they know your reaction will be to not believe them.
They get these types of letters all the time, and like all unsolicited mail from people like you, it was trashed without even being opened.( Likely by a secretary with standing orders to do so.)
And considering that you are making claims that go against actual established fact verified by real life measurements, I don't blame them.
-
Is Coulomb's force a fact?
Is atoms are on the surface of all matters a fact?
Is universal repulsion force a fact according to Coulomb's law?
Was scientists been searching for levity in the past a fact?
Did I point it out, explained its mechanism and math support?
-
Just because you started off with a few basic science facts doesn't mean that your reasoning is sound. If your model predicts that light speed in space is infinite then your model has been falsified because this is demonstrably not true. Due to signal delays, we know for a fact that light does not travel at infinite speed through space.
-
Light speed in vacuum space has never been measured. The latest time scientists measure light speed in air was 1926.
I suggested them to use MIT tech to measure light speed in vacuum glass bottle, hope someone search for the truth.
MIT had a video show off their trillion frame camera filming laser pause passing through a water bottle, in very slow motion.
Use same technology they can easily measure light speed in a vacuum glass bottle, I wrote to the tech team, they didn't reply. Don't understand why.
-
Light speed in vacuum space has never been measured.
I already told you about time delays when communicating with spacecraft. Multiple times.
-
Suppose a professor has the access, measured and find light speed in vacuum is infinite, what is he going to do?
Who will believe him?
-
Suppose a professor has the access, measured and find light speed in vacuum is infinite, what is he going to do?
Who will believe him?
Anyone who can replicate the experiment would believe him. But we already know that it's not infinite. Again, spacecraft communication delays...
-
Suppose a professor has the access, measured and find light speed in vacuum is infinite, what is he going to do?
Claim a nobel prize.
Who will believe him?
Anyone who can be bothered to replicate the experiment.
-
MIT had a video show off their trillion frame camera filming laser pause passing through a water bottle, in very slow motion.
Just for the record, this wouldn't work for two reasons.
First, the light you see in the image is scattered light- that's why it's coming out of the side of the bottle.
With a vacuum there would be nothing to scatter the light so there would be nothing to see.
Secondly, they don't really have a trillion frame per second camera.
Imagine the bus goes past my house every morning at exactly 8 am
I take a picture one morning at 8:00.
The next day I take a picture at 08:00;01
Next day at 08:00:02
and so on.
If I run those pictures together it will look like I took one picture per second.
But I'm not really taking 1 frame per second, I'm taking one picture per day.
-
-
Yes, I've seen this before.
It doesn't do anything to address the fact that signal speeds through space are known to be limited.
-
No one has the high speed camera, that is the problem.
There is an easier way to win a Nobel Prize by proving light is not wave in vacuum space.
Do a laser light double slit experiment in vacuum, light will not act as wave, light will act as particle, only two bright lines behind of the slits will show on the screen.
-
Yes, I've seen this before.
It doesn't do anything to address the fact that signal speeds through space are known to be limited.
Yes. The bottle is water filled. If we use vacuum glass bottle, laser light will disappear in the bottle but appear on the other side instantly, only needs 1 frame to cover the event.
-
laser light will disappear in the bottle but appear on the other side instantly, only needs 1 frame to cover the event.
We know for a fact that it wouldn't. You keep ignoring the spacecraft time delays I've been talking about.
-
I wrote to MIT tech camera team, suggested them to use a 3 section glass tube, water, vacuum, water connect together, filming laser pause passing through the whole tube.
-
laser light will disappear in the bottle but appear on the other side instantly, only needs 1 frame to cover the event.
We know for a fact that it wouldn't. You keep ignoring the spacecraft time delays I've been talking about.
The tech is there, why not actually do a measurement? What to worry about? 500 people not 1 reply, seems very odd.
-
The tech is there, why not actually do a measurement?
Because there's no good reason to do it.
-
The latest time scientists measure light speed in air was 1926.
It won't have changed much.
But you are wrong anyway.
This guy, for example. measured it much more recently.
http://mwca.ece.arizona.edu/People/Presentation/ZhangJitao.htm
And this depends on it too.
https://lirias.kuleuven.be/retrieve/530975
The measurement they use is the refractive index of air.
It's very close to 1. (typically about 1.0003- depending on pressure, temperature and humidity as well as wavelength)
It is the measured ratio of the speed of light in vacuum to the speed of light in air.
If you were right then the ratio would be infinity.
It isn't.
So you are wrong.
Now, as it happens, I don't have much better to do with my time than point out mistakes you made which a school student would be embarrassed about.
But the physics professors you pestered probably have.
-
I wrote to MIT tech camera team, suggested them to use a 3 section glass tube, water, vacuum, water connect together, filming laser pause passing through the whole tube.
You wouldn't have a vacuum if there was water there.
You would have water vapour.
-
Find out truth is a good reason.
For example, you say gravity speed is light speed. I say gravity is instantaneous. Who is correct?
All forces are coexist with matters, attracting or repelling all the times, therefore infinite speed. Simple FACT.
If gravity is light speed, it will be delay all the time, no planets can have stable orbit. This is simple FACT.
If LIGO can detect gravity wave from 1.3 billion years ago, why can't LIGO detect CME or earth quake?
-
I wrote to MIT tech camera team, suggested them to use a 3 section glass tube, water, vacuum, water connect together, filming laser pause passing through the whole tube.
You wouldn't have a vacuum if there was water there.
You would have water vapour.
The glass tube has 3 sections.
-
Find out truth is a good reason.
It's already been found out. Signal delays from spacecraft show what it is. It isn't infinite.
-
There is an easier way to win a Nobel Prize by proving light is not wave in vacuum space.
If you knew anything about practical science, you would know that this experiment is done many times every day.
Short wave ultraviolet light is absorbed by oxygen in the air.
So, equipment used for measuring short wave Uv is set up in vacuum chambers.
And the equipment usually uses diffraction gratings for wavelength selection (because prisms also are opaque to short wave UV).
The part of the spectrum where they do this is even called "vacuum ultraviolet".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultraviolet#Subtypes
And, since we know that diffraction gratings work in a vacuum, we know that light is still a wave in a vacuum.
It's really obvious to anyone who knows about science and light.
That's possibly why the professors didn't bother to get into an argument with you.
-
Light is not particle, all light beam double slit experiments were done is the open air. I did my research. I suggested MIT to do it too. No reply.
-
Light speed in vacuum space has never been measured. The latest time scientists measure light speed in air was 1926.
I suggested them to use MIT tech to measure light speed in vacuum glass bottle, hope someone search for the truth.
MIT had a video show off their trillion frame camera filming laser pause passing through a water bottle, in very slow motion.
Use same technology they can easily measure light speed in a vacuum glass bottle, I wrote to the tech team, they didn't reply. Don't understand why.
Probably because they get hundreds of such emails from assorted loonies..
-
all light beam double slit experiments were done is the open air.
As I pointed out, that's simply not true.
Related phenomena - which depend on diffraction are also found in the vacuum chambers use in semiconductor manufacture.
-
The first 1 to do a double slit experiment in vacuum, can prove there is no light wave in vacuum space, win a Nobel.
If you have the access, you should take this golden opportunity.
Put the slits and screen on the walls of a square glass container. Point a laser beam on the slits, video the light wave interference on the screen. Then vacuum the container, video the interference disappear and left two bright lines on the screen as if light act as particle.
In fact, light is not wave nor particle, light is vibrating electrostatic force carry by vibrating electrons/atoms.
-
Do you know what a diffraction grating is?
-
all light beam double slit experiments were done is the open air.
As I pointed out, that's simply not true.
Related phenomena - which depend on diffraction are also found in the vacuum chambers use in semiconductor manufacture.
I cannot find any video of double slit experiment done in vacuum, please show me what do you have. Thanks!
-
https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/104485/is-the-double-slit-experiment-typically-carried-out-in-a-vacuum
According to them, no.
-
Do you know what a diffraction grating is?
-
Also, do you understand what the word "typically" means in the question "Is the double-slit experiment typically carried out in a vacuum?"
-
all light beam double slit experiments were done is the open air.
As I pointed out, that's simply not true.
Related phenomena - which depend on diffraction are also found in the vacuum chambers use in semiconductor manufacture.
I cannot find any video of double slit experiment done in vacuum, please show me what do you have. Thanks!
That will be because it will have been done so long ago that there were no video recordings.
-
all light beam double slit experiments were done is the open air.
As I pointed out, that's simply not true.
Related phenomena - which depend on diffraction are also found in the vacuum chambers use in semiconductor manufacture.
I cannot find any video of double slit experiment done in vacuum, please show me what do you have. Thanks!
That will be because it will have been done so long ago that there were no video recordings.
youtube has 10's double slit experiment, all done is air. Care to take a look? 38.38
-
Yes.
So what?
Do you know what a diffraction grating is?
-
The first 1 to do a double slit experiment in vacuum, can prove there is no light wave in vacuum space, win a Nobel.
If you have the access, you should take this golden opportunity.
Put the slits and screen on the walls of a square glass container. Point a laser beam on the slits, video the light wave interference on the screen. Then vacuum the container, video the interference disappear and left two bright lines on the screen as if light act as particle.
In fact, light is not wave nor particle, light is vibrating electrostatic force carry by vibrating electrons/atoms.
Many people can repeat it after you, but you will get credit. If you can, do a video to change the world!
-
Find out truth is a good reason.
For example, you say gravity speed is light speed. I say gravity is instantaneous. Who is correct?
All forces are coexist with matters, attracting or repelling all the times, therefore infinite speed. Simple FACT.
If gravity is light speed, it will be delay all the time, no planets can have stable orbit. This is simple FACT.
If LIGO can detect gravity wave from 1.3 billion years ago, why can't LIGO detect CME or earth quake?
Seems all agreed?
-
Seems all agreed?
Nope.
-
Seems all agreed?
Nope.
You say so but I feel your mind is agreed. Otherwise you will quote something to against me.
-
Otherwise you will quote something to against me.
You might want to learn how logic works, because that ain't it.
-
Otherwise you will quote something to against me.
You might want to learn how logic works, because that ain't it.
No where to quote something to against me?
-
No where to quote something to against me?
I don't need to. I've already proven you wrong in reply #7.
-
I wrong is OK, as long as my logic is correct.
Agree?
-
Image the vacuum double slit experiment in action, the wave pattern disappearing as the air pumping out, only two light lines left on the screen.
You just changed the history!
You own me a drink.
-
The first 1 to do a double slit experiment in vacuum, can prove there is no light wave in vacuum space, win a Nobel.
If you have the access, you should take this golden opportunity.
Put the slits and screen on the walls of a square glass container. Point a laser beam on the slits, video the light wave interference on the screen. Then vacuum the container, video the interference disappear and left two bright lines on the screen as if light act as particle.
In fact, light is not wave nor particle, light is vibrating electrostatic force carry by vibrating electrons/atoms.
Many people can repeat it after you, but you will get credit. If you can, do a video to change the world!
Please make sure the slits and the screen are on the inside of the container walls. Nothing is between the slits and screen. No air, no glass, only empty space.
-
I wrong is OK, as long as my logic is correct.
But it isn't correct. Light travels through space at a limited speed.
-
I wrong is OK, as long as my logic is correct.
But it isn't correct. Light travels through space at a limited speed.
What is light?
Light is energy, energy must coexist with matter. There is no light in the space between hot plasma on the Sun and atmosphere on Earth.
All scientists thought light is EM wave or photon particle or both traveling in space at light speed. They are all wrong. There is no wave, no photon, nothing traveling in space at light speed. Energy jumps from matter to matter instantly, becomes light wave traveling in medium at light speed. Light speed in vacuum space is infinite. Therefore, relativity, QM and electromagnetism are all wrong.
By using MIT 10 trillion frame per second high speed camera, scientists can measure light speed in a vacuum glass bottle to prove light speed in vacuum is infinite. But they won't do it, because if the truth is out, they will be in big trouble.
Electromagnetic Radiation
Electrons are on the surface of all matters. Electrons are constantly vibrating due to the thermal energy atoms carried. The higher temperature the higher vibration frequency.
Vibrating electrons carry kinetic energy, that energy can transfer to distant electrons through the repulsion force between line of sight electrons, science call it electromagnetic radiation. In Fact, there is only electrostatic radiation, there is no electromagnetic radiation.
How to prove it?
Electrostatic force decays at 1/R^2, EM wave strength decays at 1/R^2, Magnetic force decays at 1/R^3.
-
All scientists thought light is EM wave or photon particle or both traveling in space at light speed. They are all wrong.
This is the statement that I proved wrong in reply #7. Maybe you should actually go back and read it.
-
All scientists thought light is EM wave or photon particle or both traveling in space at light speed. They are all wrong.
This is the statement that I proved wrong in reply #7. Maybe you should actually go back and read it.
Tell you truth my friend. Your comment is as thebox comment to me.
-
Tell you truth my friend. Your comment is as thebox comment to me.
I'm not sure what that is supposed to mean, but it's simply a fact of the matter that it takes time to send signals to spacecraft to tell them what to do and then wait for them to respond. That's not debatable. It is observably true. If you conclude anything else, then your conclusion is at odds with reality.
-
It is fact that LIGO said detected gravity wave from 1.3 billion years ago.
It is fact that gravity is instantaneous otherwise no planets have stable orbit.
It is fact that force are coexisting with matters all the times, therefore must be instantaneous.
Which fact is true fact?
-
It is fact that LIGO said detected gravity wave from 1.3 billion years ago.
It is fact that gravity is instantaneous otherwise no planets have stable orbit.
It is fact that force are coexisting with matters all the times, therefore must be instantaneous.
Which fact is true fact?
Red herring. Those are just distractions from the fact that you are burying your head in the sand instead of admitting that signal delay between spacecraft proves your idea wrong.
-
I suggested you to watch Apollo videos, check out those shadows right under the objects as if the Sun is over head.
NASA must land on the moon at morning time to avoid high heat, how come they took videos at room time?
Many many many shadows are right under objects, how can you explain away?
Watch the LM fabric analysis video, seek the truth for yourself, don't cheat to yourself.
-
I suggested you to watch Apollo videos, check out those shadows right under the objects as if the Sun is over head.
NASA must land on the moon at morning time to avoid high heat, how come they took videos at room time?
Many many many shadows are right under objects, how can you explain away?
Watch the LM fabric analysis video, seek the truth for yourself, don't cheat to yourself.
Still red herrings. Even if it was true that the Moon landings were faked, that still doesn't do anything to change the fact that it is takes time to send signals to spacecraft and then to wait for a response.
-
-
This isn't relevant to the discussion of whether light travels through space instantly or not.
-
I suggested you to watch Apollo videos, check out those shadows right under the objects as if the Sun is over head.
NASA must land on the moon at morning time to avoid high heat, how come they took videos at room time?
Many many many shadows are right under objects, how can you explain away?
Watch the LM fabric analysis video, seek the truth for yourself, don't cheat to yourself.
Still red herrings. Even if it was true that the Moon landings were faked, that still doesn't do anything to change the fact that it is takes time to send signals to spacecraft and then to wait for a response.
23 watt radio sent clear picture from billions of miles away is fact? Or fiction?
-
23 watt radio sent clear picture from billions of miles away is fact? Or fiction?
We've been through this before. Besides, the Voyager probes are far from the only spacecraft sent to other planets.
-
If as you said NASA faked moon landing, they might fake more.
Agree?
-
If as you said NASA faked moon landing, they might fake more.
Agree?
Except that countries from all around the world have sent spacecraft to other planets. So obviously you are talking about a conspiracy that goes far beyond NASA.
You can stop being ridiculous now.
-
Few years ago they said solar sail is working in space. EM drive is coming.
Well, quantum vacuum virtual plasma powered EM drive is not working.
Photons are imaginary, navy laser cannot disturb a flame or move a smoke, what momentum?
-
Few years ago they said solar sail is working in space. EM drive is coming.
Well, quantum vacuum virtual plasma powered EM drive is not working.
Photons are imaginary, navy laser cannot disturb a flame or move a smoke, what momentum?
You need to cut it out with the red herrings...
-
If as you said NASA faked moon landing, they might fake more.
Agree?
Except that countries from all around the world have sent spacecraft to other planets. So obviously you are talking about a conspiracy that goes far beyond NASA.
You can stop being ridiculous now.
If you think China moon landing is real, more power to you. I have nothing more to discuss with you. Best luck!
-
If you think China moon landing is real, more power to you. I have nothing more to discuss with you. Best luck!
If your only way of addressing the signal delays between spacecraft is by shouting "conspiracy!" then you're on the wrong website. This is a website for serious scientific discussion, not unevidenced paranoia. You should probably go to the AboveTopSecret message board instead.
-
Few years ago they said solar sail is working in space. EM drive is coming.
Well, quantum vacuum virtual plasma powered EM drive is not working.
Photons are imaginary, navy laser cannot disturb a flame or move a smoke, what momentum?
I realize there is no way to change your mind. If you cannot point out logic and fact to debunk me, I will not reply you anymore.
-
I realize there is no way to change your mind.
You're trying to change my mind by posing that there is some gigantic, global conspiracy among the space agencies of the world to fool everyone about signal delays in space that has been going on for over 50 years and has even been orchestrated between enemy nations (such as the United States and the Soviet Union). You have absolutely no evidence for such a conspiracy, so obviously I am not convinced by such a ridiculous notion.
How can you expect anyone in the science community to take a notion like that seriously?
If you cannot point out logic and fact to debunk me, I will not reply you anymore.
I did, but you tried to argue that those facts were part of a conspiracy in order to sweep them under a rug. You cannot do science by writing off contrary evidence as part of a conspiracy.
-
Few years ago they said solar sail is working in space. EM drive is coming.
Well, quantum vacuum virtual plasma powered EM drive is not working.
Photons are imaginary, navy laser cannot disturb a flame or move a smoke, what momentum?
Facts or not? Laser photon energy able to vaporize air plan, but cannot disturb a flame.
Why? Because there is no photon particle. Laser light is vibrating electrostatic force, passing through air, energize the target metal to heat it up and vaporize it. Not photons carry momentum impacting the metal.
-
Facts or not? Laser photon energy able to vaporize air plan, but cannot disturb a flame.
Why? Because there is no photon particle. Laser light is vibrating electrostatic force, passing through air, energize the target metal to heat it up and vaporize it. Not photons carry momentum impacting the metal.
Light does carry momentum:
But knowing you, you'll probably claim that this video was faked.
-
Photoelectric effect is misinterpretation. Light wave energy density is proportional to frequency. When light wave frequency is high enough, electrons will be vibrating out from solar cell.
There is no photon particle impact electron and knock it out from atoms.
That's why Einstein said he knows NOT what are light quanta. Everyone thinks he knows it is mistaken.
-
EM drive, wrap drive, photonic drive, all fiction. 1000 watt power, 1 mili newton trust? In the air?
Otherwise no one will still using rocket fuel. It has been used for thousands of years. Why?
-
Photoelectric effect is misinterpretation. Light wave energy density is proportional to frequency. When light wave frequency is high enough, electrons will be vibrating out from solar cell.
There is no photon particle impact electron and knock it out from atoms.
That's why Einstein said he knows NOT what are light quanta. Everyone thinks he knows it is mistaken.
That has nothing to do with the video I posted.
EM drive, wrap drive, photonic drive, all fiction. 1000 watt power, 1 mili newton trust? In the air?
Can I conclude from this remark that you do believe that the footage I posted was faked?
Otherwise no one will still using rocket fuel.
Photonic thrusters provide very little thrust for the amount of energy put into them. You can't launch a rocket from the Earth that way, which is why we still use conventional rockets.
-
Do you know what a diffraction grating is?
-
I realize there is no way to change your mind. If you cannot point out logic and fact to debunk me, I will not reply you anymore.
You already don't reply.
That may be because you are dim, or rude or don't understand the question or are trolling or whatever.
Because you will not reply you do not give me a chance to explain that you are wrong.
That's why I can't change your mind.
You could change my mind, but you would need to provide evidence.
So far, all you have done is show that you don't understand basic physics.
-
Facts or not? Laser photon energy able to vaporize air plan, but cannot disturb a flame.
If I fire a shell at a building I expect it to damage the building.
But, if the shell happens to go in through an open window, through the building and then out through another window, it won't have any effect.
Light goes through flames in much the same way.
It goes through, without stopping.
So why would you expect it to disturb the flame?
-
Because electrons are on the surface of all matters, and because line of sight electrons are constantly repelling each other with Coulomb's force, therefore between the surfaces of matter A and matter B there exists an universal repulsion force
What you are ignoring is that the strength of Coulomb attraction between electrons and protons is so great that wherever you have a collection of electrons (eg on the surface of a star), in that same cubic millimeter you have almost exactly the same number of protons.
This means that the net electrical charge of that cubic milimeter is zero. The same applies to the surface of the Moon - zero net charge.
That means that the repulsive force you are hypothesising does not exist for macroscopic objects like stars, planets or Moons.
This repulsive force only exists when you exert a large amount of energy to remove a few electrons from some material, such as with a Van der Graaf generator. This might cause someone's hair to stand on end for a few seconds or a few minutes. But the attraction between protons and electrons is so great that the charge will quickly leak away, leaving the surface of everything electrically neutral again.
Even if you do manage to separate a few electrons and protons within a room (eg with a Van der Graaf generator), the room as a whole is still electrically neutral. So these long-range electrostatic forces do not exist.
-
Because electrons are on the surface of all matters, and because line of sight electrons are constantly repelling each other with Coulomb's force, therefore between the surfaces of matter A and matter B there exists an universal repulsion force
What you are ignoring is that the strength of Coulomb attraction between electrons and protons is so great that wherever you have a collection of electrons (eg on the surface of a star), in that same cubic millimeter you have almost exactly the same number of protons.
This means that the net electrical charge of that cubic milimeter is zero. The same applies to the surface of the Moon - zero net charge.
That means that the repulsive force you are hypothesising does not exist for macroscopic objects like stars, planets or Moons.
This repulsive force only exists when you exert a large amount of energy to remove a few electrons from some material, such as with a Van der Graaf generator. This might cause someone's hair to stand on end for a few seconds or a few minutes. But the attraction between protons and electrons is so great that the charge will quickly leak away, leaving the surface of everything electrically neutral again.
Even if you do manage to separate a few electrons and protons within a room (eg with a Van der Graaf generator), the room as a whole is still electrically neutral. So these long-range electrostatic forces do not exist.
The attraction force between proton and electron is so strong, how can the electron and proton don't stick together? What force or mechanism to separate them?
Electrons are on the surface of all atoms is fact. Electrons repel each other with Coulomb's force is fact. Therefore levity is fact.
You think 500 professors know less then you? Why they all keep quite?
-
The attraction force between proton and electron is so strong, how can the electron and proton don't stick together? What force or mechanism to separate them?
This has already been explained to you multiple times.
You think 500 professors know less then you? Why they all keep quite?
Because they aren't going to waste their time trying to deal with someone who is so obviously anti-science.
-
If you are truth seeker, you should copy my letter or take my theory to ask your professors or top scientists.
Find out what answers you will get.
Why argue with me? I have no degree. No credit. Just theory.
I asked on reddit, they blocked my question, why?
-
If you are truth seeker, you should copy my letter or take my theory to ask your professors or top scientists.
The answers are already known and they contradict what you say. So taking your anti-science assertions to anyone would be a waste of time.
Why argue with me? I have no degree. No credit. Just theory.
It's not even a theory. It's speculation that is known to be wrong.
I asked on reddit, they blocked my question, why?
Probably for the same reason that you didn't get a response from any of those professors: your ideas are just plain wrong and you won't accept that fact.
-
What is light?
Light is energy, energy must coexist with matter. There is no light in the space between hot plasma on the Sun and atmosphere on Earth.
All scientists thought light is EM wave or photon particle or both traveling in space at light speed. They are all wrong. There is no wave, no photon, nothing traveling in space at light speed. Energy teleport from matter to matter instantly, becomes light wave traveling in medium at light speed. Light speed in vacuum space is infinite. Therefore, cosmology, relativity, QM and electromagnetism are all wrong.
By using MIT 10 trillion frame per second high speed camera, scientists can measure light speed in a vacuum glass bottle to prove light speed in vacuum is infinite. But they won't do it, because if the truth is out, they will be in big trouble.
Electromagnetic Radiation
Electrons are on the surface of all matters. Electrons are constantly vibrating due to the thermal energy atoms carried. The higher temperature the higher vibration frequency.
Vibrating electrons carry kinetic energy, that energy can transfer to distant electrons through the repulsion force between line of sight electrons F=Ke x ee/R^2, science call it electromagnetic radiation. In Fact, there is only electrostatic radiation, there is no electromagnetic radiation.
How to prove it?
Electrostatic force decays at 1/R^2, light wave strength decays at 1/R^2, Magnetic force decays at 1/R^3.
Photoelectric effect is misinterpretation. Light wave energy density is proportional to frequency. When light wave frequency is high enough, electrons will be vibrating out from solar cell.
There is no photon particle impact electron and knock it out from atoms.
That's why Einstein said he knows NOT what are light quanta. Everyone thinks he knows it is mistaken.
The first person to do a double slit experiment in vacuum, prove there is no light wave in vacuum space, can win a Nobel and change the history.
If you have the access, you should take this unique opportunity in history..
Put the slits and screen on the walls of a square glass container. Point a laser beam on the slits, video the light wave interference on the screen. Then vacuum the container, video the interference disappear and left two bright lines on the screen as if light act as particle.
In fact, light is not wave nor particle, light is vibrating electrostatic force carry by vibrating electrons/atoms.
Please make sure the slits and the screen are on the inside of the container walls. Nothing is between the slits and screen. No air, no glass, only empty space.
-
But they won't do it, because if the truth is out, they will be in big trouble.
Nobody will be in trouble.
-
they blocked my question, why?
because it's sh1t.
-
Admit it seeker 3.
You know you are wrong.
That's why you refuse to answer my points.
-
Why Reddit blocked my question?
I asked 500 top physics professors the same question, not 1 reply, why?
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskPhysics/comments/anw1i9/i_think_i_discovered_a_new_force_how_do_you_think/
-
Why Reddit blocked my question?
I asked 500 top physics professors the same question, not 1 reply, why?
We've already answered these questions. You need to stop asking the same question more than once. Are you expecting the answers to change when you ask a second or third time?
-
Reddit even removed my question. Very strange. Blocked is not enough?
-
Reddit even removed my question. Very strange. Blocked is not enough?
What you were posting was anti-science on a science message board. So it's not surprising that they got rid of it.
-
So an-ti science is the reason those 500 professors refuse to answer my question?
Few would tell me my mistake, maybe? Those are top guys.
-
So an-ti science is the reason those 500 professors refuse to answer my question?
Few would tell me my mistake, maybe? Those are top guys.
They probably predicted (and accurately, at that) that you wouldn't listen to their corrections.
-
Even you pointed out many many of my mistakes.
They should know a little more than you, agree?
-
Even you pointed out many many of my mistakes.
Yes, but the problem is that you always ignore your mistakes. Which is exactly why those professors weren't going to bother trying to debate with you.
They should know a little more than you, agree?
Knowing more than me doesn't mean that they are willing to waste their time trying to debate with you.
-
Why would you waste your time debating?
-
Why would you waste your time debating?
Because I have a lot of free time, unlike those professors.
-
So you are wasting free time debating to kill time, not learning for truth?
-
So you are wasting free time debating to kill time, not learning for truth?
I learn in my free time as well.
-
Why Reddit blocked my question?
I asked 500 top physics professors the same question, not 1 reply, why?
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskPhysics/comments/anw1i9/i_think_i_discovered_a_new_force_how_do_you_think/
Discovered a new force would be a great news, why they deleted the content? They already blocked the question. Very strange?
-
They even deleted 1 of my comments.
Why? Blocked the question, weeks later deleted content and comment in a blocked thread?
Why bother? Can they just delete the whole thing?
-
Very strange?
No.
They are just taking out the trash.
-
Do you know what a diffraction grating is?
-
Discovered a new force would be a great news
You didn't discover a new force.
-
500 professors, no one said I am wrong.
Is that odd? If I am wrong.
-
500 professors, no one said I am wrong.
They didn't say you were right either. They didn't say anything at all.
-
500 professors, no one said I am wrong.
They didn't say you were right either. They didn't say anything at all.
So you know better than 500 people? Otherwise why debunk me with stupid content?
-
So you know better than 500 people?
I never said anything remotely to that effect and you know it.
Otherwise why debunk me with stupid content?
Given that I haven't debunked you with "stupid content", I can't answer that question.
-
You can take it as a joke if you like.
Newton discovered gravity, I discovered levity.
What have you discovered?
-
Newton discovered gravity, I discovered levity.
You didn't discover the fact that electrons repel each other.
-
Newton discovered gravity, I discovered levity.
You didn't discover the fact that electrons repel each other.
I pointed it out, explained it, give it equation. predicted light speed in space is infinite, give light precise mechanism.
Levity originally was thought to be a physical force exactly like gravity but pulling in the opposite direction, like the helium in a balloon. As recently as the 19th century, scientists were still arguing about its existence. I proved it using Coulomb's law.
-
I pointed it out, explained it, give it equation
All of which was already done.
predicted light speed in space is infinite, give light precise mechanism.
Which are both wrong.
I proved it using Coulomb's law.
No you didn't.
-
Come on, this is serious matter.
If I were wrong, how come no one out 500 professors correcting me? That is their job and pleasure.
-
Come on, this is serious matter.
I know it is.
If I were wrong, how come no one out 500 professors correcting me?
This has been answered before.
That is their job and pleasure.
No, trying to argue with science denialists is not their job.
-
500 professors, no one said I am wrong.
Is that odd? If I am wrong.
What you said was new and different.
If it had been right, do you not think that many of them would have replied?
-
Most teachers will point out your mistakes instantly?
I been nice asking and thanked them.
-
Most teachers will point out your mistakes instantly?
In the classroom to their students.
-
I told them Einstein and Newton both wrong about light.
Why no one debunk or correct me? Maybe they accepted my theory in their hearts already?
Maybe they are working on their own modified new theory?
Unified field theory in my opinion is already prove by me.
I suggested and proved all forces are electrostatic force in nature.
-
I told them Einstein and Newton both wrong about light.
That's when they knew they were dealing with a science denialist.
Why no one debunk or correct me?
Because, as you have proven on this forum, that would be an extremely lengthy, uphill battle.
Maybe they accepted my theory in their hearts already?
Yeah... keep telling yourself that...
Maybe they are working on their own modified new theory?
They wouldn't have to be in order to know that you are wrong.
Unified field theory in my opinion is already prove by me.
It hasn't.
I suggested and proved all forces are electrostatic force in nature.
No you didn't.
-
Suppose strong force is real force carried by gluon, if it is not negative charged, how can it attract positive charged protons to stick together? What is the mechanism? What is the logic?
Why strong force has short range? What kind force is that?
-
Suppose strong force is real force carried by gluon, if it is not negative charged, how can it attract positive charged protons to stick together?
Because it isn't acting on the positive electric charge of the proton, it's acting on the color charge of the quarks inside the proton.
Why strong force has short range?
Because the mesons that carry the strong force are unstable. They decay in a tiny fraction of a second, so they can't reach particles that are very far away.
-
Word puzzle again?
-
The Standard Model
Before we understand atoms, how can we learn the universe? If the standard model is wrong, the fundamental science will be wrong.
The standard model is recognized by nearly all particle physicists as wrong in the sense that it is incomplete and only correct in a phenomenological sense.
When scientists give up and call things the strong force, weak force, up, down, bottom, top, strange and charm, it says all.
Scientists think 1 electron and 1 proton able to form a hydrogen atom. That is impossible.
The 2 particles attract each other with the strongest attraction force in nature F=Ke x pe/R^2. The attraction force between electron and proton is 10^33 times stronger than 2 neodymium magnets. What force can separate proton and electron?
Therefore they must stick together under that force. The electron is impossible to orbit, wave or cloud around the proton to form a stable atom.
Scientists invented a force called strong force, it holds protons together. They forgot to invent another force, that keeps electron away from proton, so atoms able to form. Why protons stick together but electron and proton don't stick together?
They invented uncertainty principle, wave-particle duality, wave function collapse, electron shell, orbital, quantum state, energy level, electron hole, electron cloud. All imaginary, made up word puzzles that have nothing to do with reality.
The standard model is like a monkey story.
So sad. You got to follow that story to get a degree. You got to teach that story to become a teacher.
-
Word puzzle again?
No, it's not a puzzle.
If you understood the physics which you are saying is wrong, then you would know what that all meant.
The problem is that you have not learned what you are talking about.
Now, perhaps you would like to answer the question I posed earlier.
What you said was new and different.
If it had been right, do you not think that many of them would have replied?
-
Suppose strong force is real force carried by gluon, if it is not negative charged, how can it attract positive charged protons to stick together?
Because it isn't acting on the positive electric charge of the proton, it's acting on the color charge of the quarks inside the proton.
Why strong force has short range?
Because the mesons that carry the strong force are unstable. They decay in a tiny fraction of a second, so they can't reach particles that are very far away.
What is color charge? Positive or negative? How color charge interact with real charge? Mechanism?
If strong force decays in a fraction of a second, what force makes protons stick together?
-
What is color charge?
If you understood the physics which you are saying is wrong, then you would know what that all meant.
The problem is that you have not learned what you are talking about.
If strong force decays in a fraction of a second
Nobody said it did.
You need to learn to read properly, rather than just looking for things that you think are wrong.
What you said was new and different.
If it had been right, do you not think that many of them would have replied?
-
Word puzzle again?
You would do yourself a favor by actually doing some research before trying to debate about this. Particle physicists don't have any trouble understanding the concepts that I've been talking about.
What is color charge?
It's the charge associated with the strong force in the same way that electric charge is associated with the electromagnetic force.
Positive or negative?
Neither. Look here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_charge
How color charge interact with real charge?
It doesn't. It only interacts with other color charges.
If strong force decays in a fraction of a second, what force makes protons stick together?
The strong force holds the protons together. Although the particles decay in a fraction of a second, new ones are continually being creating in the fields around the proton.The Standard Model
Before we understand atoms, how can we learn the universe? If the standard model is wrong, the fundamental science will be wrong.
The standard model is recognized by nearly all particle physicists as wrong in the sense that it is incomplete and only correct in a phenomenological sense.
When scientists give up and call things the strong force, weak force, up, down, bottom, top, strange and charm, it says all.
Scientists think 1 electron and 1 proton able to form a hydrogen atom. That is impossible.
The 2 particles attract each other with the strongest attraction force in nature F=Ke x pe/R^2. The attraction force between electron and proton is 10^33 times stronger than 2 neodymium magnets. What force can separate proton and electron?
Therefore they must stick together under that force. The electron is impossible to orbit, wave or cloud around the proton to form a stable atom.
Scientists invented a force called strong force, it holds protons together. They forgot to invent another force, that keeps electron away from proton, so atoms able to form. Why protons stick together but electron and proton don't stick together?
They invented uncertainty principle, wave-particle duality, wave function collapse, electron shell, orbital, quantum state, energy level, electron hole, electron cloud. All imaginary, made up word puzzles that have nothing to do with reality.
The standard model is like a monkey story.
So sad. You got to follow that story to get a degree. You got to teach that story to become a teacher.
You really need to stop it with these anti-science speeches.
-
The strong force holds the protons together. Although the particles decay in a fraction of a second, new ones are continually being creating in the fields around the proton.
What is the mechanism? Fart?
-
What is the mechanism? Fart?
You clearly aren't interested in learning, so I don't see why you bother to ask questions.
-
Run out of gas?
-
What is the speed of Coulomb's force?
No matter how far away, charged particles are connected by Coulomb's force, therefore entangled all the time.
Information teleport universally. Existence continues.
-
What is the speed of Coulomb's force?
C
-
Light/EM wave speed is the speed of energy propagate through matter/medium. There is no light in vacuum space.
Gravity, Coulomb's force, levity and magnetic force are always coexisting with matters. Therefore forces have no speed, forces are instantaneous.
Simple fact and logic, why most people cannot understand?
-
There is no light in vacuum space.
There plainly is, or it wouldn't reach us from the Sun.
This is a "Simple fact and logic, "
why can't you understand it?
-
Light/EM wave speed is the speed of energy propagate through matter/medium.
No it isn't. Light travels more slowly through matter than it does in a vacuum and it varies depending on the index of refraction of the matter.
There is no light in vacuum space.
The only way you can support that assertion is by invoking a global conspiracy for which you have zero evidence. Therefore, there is no reason why we should take it seriously.
Gravity, Coulomb's force, levity and magnetic force are always coexisting with matters. Therefore forces have no speed, forces are instantaneous.
No they aren't. That would violate causality.
Simple fact and logic, why most people cannot understand?
Because it's neither fact nor logic. It's wrong.
-
500 professors and 1600 readers, only 2 people still think gravity has light speed? Good!
Sun light reaches us through repulsion force between electrons on the surface of Sun and earth, energy teleport between lines of sight electrons. That is the mechanism of radiation.
Your goal is to learn truth, not against.
-
500 professors and 1600 readers, only 2 people still think gravity has light speed? Good!
500 professors, 1600 readers and only one person who thinks you are right.
-
Electrostatic force rules the universe. Charged particles made the universe.
1 electron and 1 proton cannot form a hydrogen atom. Simple fact.
Atoms are not 99.99% empty space, simple fact.
Forces have no speed, simple fact.
-
1 electron and 1 proton cannot form a hydrogen atom. Simple fact.
You will have to do much better than
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_by_assertion
to convince us.Forces have no speed, simple fact.
It's fairly easy to set up an experiment to show that is wrong.
-
500 professors and 1600 readers, only 2 people still think gravity has light speed? Good!
When did those 500 professors and 1600 readers tell you they don't think gravity moves at light speed? No answer is no answer.
Sun light reaches us through repulsion force between electrons on the surface of Sun and earth, energy teleport between lines of sight electrons. That is the mechanism of radiation.
That's still wrong.
Your goal is to learn truth, not against.
That is exactly why we're arguing against you.
1 electron and 1 proton cannot form a hydrogen atom. Simple fact.
This statement is wrong.
Atoms are not 99.99% empty space, simple fact.
You're actually correct this time. They contain even more empty space than that.
Forces have no speed, simple fact.
If force traveled at infinite speed, then the speed of sound would be infinite (since the force between the atoms that transmits sound would move infinitely fast). Sound doesn't move at infinite speed, so you are wrong.
-
Forces don't travel, forces either attract or repel. Forces have attitude, direction and carrier. Forces don't have speed. Forces are coexisting with matters. All facts.
1 electron and 1 proton can only attract each other, there is no mechanism for them to not stick together. Word puzzle and word salad is not science. Without precise mechanism all theory is just theory.
I discovered levity, fact or not? I explained the mechanism of gravity, fact or not? I showed what is the mechanism of light, fact or not?
Don't against truth. Right is right, wrong is wrong. By the end, you will face the truth.
-
Forces don't travel, forces either attract or repel. Forces have attitude, direction and carrier. Forces don't have speed. Forces are coexisting with matters. All facts.
So why isn't the speed of sound infinite? If forces move at infinite speed, then the atoms that make up a material would have to push on each other instantly. Thus, an infinite speed of sound.
1 electron and 1 proton can only attract each other, there is no mechanism for them to not stick together.
Sure there is. It's called Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. You not liking the answer won't change it (cue your stock "what is precise mechanism?" response).
Word puzzle and word salad is not science.
The only one posting word puzzles and word salad here is you. Scientists understand their theories. You inability to understand them is not evidence that they are wrong.
Without precise mechanism all theory is just theory.
Do you know what a scientific theory is? It isn't the same for the common usage of the word theory (which is a synonym for a guess). You should probably look it up.
I discovered levity, fact or not?
Not.
I explained the mechanism of gravity, fact or not?
Not.
I showed what is the mechanism of light, fact or not?
Not.
Don't against truth.
I think this is a sentence fragment.
Right is right, wrong is wrong. By the end, you will face the truth.
A "truth" that you can only support by invoking conspiracy theories.
-
Sound and light must exist in a medium. Sound is the medium vibrating. Light is the electrostatic force vibrating.
In vacuum space, no matter, no charged particle, no force carrier, therefore no light or sound wave can exist.
What is uncertain principle? 1 electron and 1 proton at r distance, only 1 force exists, F=Ke x pq/R^2. Those two particles must stick together under attraction force. This is 100% certain fact.
Simple logic, are you playing fool? Why?
-
Sound and light must exist in a medium. Sound is the medium vibrating. Light is the electrostatic force vibrating.
That doesn't answer why the speed of sound isn't infinite if the speed of the force traveling through matter is infinite.
In vacuum space, no matter, no charged particle, no force carrier, therefore no light or sound wave can exist.
Observably incorrect.
What is uncertain principle?
I already answered this question in the past, but just so you have something to read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle
1 electron and 1 proton at r distance, only 1 force exists, F=Ke x pq/R^2. Those two particles must stick together under attraction force. This is 100% certain fact.
They are already as stuck together as they can be. Subatomic particles aren't solid little balls of matter, you know. You are ignoring their quantum mechanical nature, such as their wave properties.
Simple logic, are you playing fool? Why?
Your logic is flawed and contradicts scientific evidence.
-
You don't even understand why gravity has no speed, what else can you understand?
Until you understood why forces are instantaneous, don't waste time reply.
Anyone thinks gravity propagating at light speed, please speak up.
-
You don't even understand why gravity has no speed, what else can you understand?
You haven't given any experimental evidence to support your position. All you ever do is keep repeating your unsubstantiated claims.
Until you understood why forces are instantaneous, don't waste time reply.
If forces were instantaneous, the speed of sound would be infinite. It isn't, so the forces acting between the atoms aren't instantaneous. You have yet to explain this apparent contradiction between the measurably finite speed of sound and your claim that forces act instantly.
-
Without precise mechanism all theory is just theory.
-
Travel to a physical place is possible. Travel to the past or the future is not possible, because the past and future are imaginary, are not a physical location.
Time travel is not science fiction but science lie.
Our science education is bad, people are mostly confused.
Science = Liece
There is no black hole.
An electron cannot orbit/cloud/wave around proton to form an atom.
The Sun is not a fusion reactor.
NASA never went to the moon.
Mars missions are all fake.
LIGO never detected gravity wave from 1.3 billion years ago.
Time travel is a lie. Simulation is a lie.
Relativity is BS. Cosmology is BS. QM is BS. Electromagnetism is half correct.
There is no light in vacuum space.
Sunlight reaches us instantly.
Gravity speed is infinite.
I am going to write a book to expose all science lies.
Without a precise mechanism of a theory, there is no science.
-
I am going to write a book to expose all science lies.
Be sure to check with your lawyers.
Libelling all scientists may get you into trouble.
-
That list sounds more like a conspiracy theory than a new theory.
-
Do you plan on explaining why the speed of sound is finite any time soon?
-
Do you plan on explaining why the speed of sound is finite any time soon?
F=ma, force and motion. No mass/matter can move at infinite speed. All waves, sound, light, whatever wave are matter waving. No waves in vacuum space.
Hold a magnet in each hand, feel the repulsion force? Now wave 1 hand, feel the energy teleport to other hand? Is there any magnetic wave traveling at light speed between hands?
-
There are two kinds of forces, attraction force and repulsion force.
Electrostatic force, gravity, levity, magnetic force, even imaginary string and weak force are instantaneous. Forces don't travel or propagate in space at light speed.
Forces are inherited property of matter, indestructible and immortal.
-
Hold a magnet in each hand, feel the repulsion force? Now wave 1 hand, feel the energy teleport to other hand? Is there any magnetic wave traveling at light speed between hands?
That experiment is far too crude to possibly get any kind of speed estimate out of it. Do you think the human senses are precise enough to tell the difference between the speed of light and instantaneous movement on such a small scale? They can't.
Electrostatic force, gravity, levity, magnetic force, even imaginary string and weak force are instantaneous. Forces don't travel or propagate in space at light speed.
Argument from assertion. Please learn what evidence is.
-
Is there any magnetic wave traveling at light speed between hands?
Yes, it will take about three billionths of a second to travel.
Would you notice a delay like that?
If not, then it's a silly experiment, isn't it?
-
The laser beams that you see in space westerns and other scifi drivel are not real, because there is nothing in space to scatter the beam towards your eye. You can't see the light from the projector in a really clean cinema until it is reflected from the screen, but it is scattered from cigarette smoke. Same with the bottle of water.
Since every criminal knows this, and uses smoke or dry ice to check for laser alarm grids, I guess the physics professors assumed that everyone else did, and thus ignored the questions as the ravings of a crank.
I was once assigned the job of reading crank letters to the Department of Health just in case there was something of legal or clinical significance behind them. Interestingly, most were written in green ink. I mentioned this to a colleague in the Ministry of Defence who pointed out that the naval tradition is that all and only admirals use green ink.