0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
We need better monkeys or fewer typewriters.
Quote from: Bored chemist on 28/10/2008 19:35:17We need better monkeys or fewer typewriters.JG:I started my theory with an old 1898 Underwood typewriter. That was in 1981. It wore out but I miss it.
I seem to be having trouble explaining the dot-wave theory to others. The last week I reformated it to present the most important points up front. Here is the introduction to chapter 1. Please let me know what you think about it.
Quote from: jerrygg38 on 16/11/2008 01:58:28 I seem to be having trouble explaining the dot-wave theory to others. The last week I reformated it to present the most important points up front. Here is the introduction to chapter 1. Please let me know what you think about it. I think that you have yet to put forward anything that even looks like it might, one day, grow up to be evidence. I also think that, while it is true that your text is difficult to understand (for example, you go on at length about "dot waves" but fail to make any attempt to say what they are), there is a much bigger barrier to our acceptance of the "theory"; nobody thinks it's worth the trouble.Before you set out a new idea for the univers it's probably going to help if you point out anything that's wrong with the current model. Then you need to explain how your model works better.Good luck, come back when you have finished and can present us with something that is anywhere like as successful as current modern physics.
"How does the current model explain why the electron holds in the Bohr atom rather than flow into the proton. "QM
Experiments show that "speed" isn't well defined on this scale. If your model calculates it then it's wrong.