0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
But if the logic in the paper is debatable - the logic in conventional physics is equally so - especially as this relates to quantum electrodynamics. ...I found the fault with quantum electrodynamics - that I fondly believe is 'blocking' the progress of all science. I proved it on the circuit. But now I must defend my position by arguing the error with the use of mathematics. I can't. All I can do is apply simple logic.
It is a field that has achieved the greatest breakthroughs in science. But its proponents are in danger of putting it out of the realm of simple inspection. They protect it's excellence with a dedication that is better likened to the smug pretentions of the early Church. They took about 600 years to admit an error. I'd hate to think our scientists will take that long.
It was the required result from my field model. Now how do we get past that one?
I actually de-registered from the forum - ThAT Sophiecentaur - an example of 'pique' which you've accused me of before. Your preveious reference was inappropriate. But I've now re-registered. I'll tell you why. I realise that your reaction to my field model is entirely understandable. I'd overlooked the fact that you're at that age where you simply can't bend your mind around new concepts. How stupid of me. For a while there I thought your opinion mattered.That you tend to bluster and complain, and dismiss my efforts with such wide, sweeping criticisms - rather than tackle the actual points that I raise, is just further proof of this. You see, the mind also suffers a kind of arthritis. That's why the over sixties simply cannot understand the model. So indeed, I'd rather suggest that you don't read it. I'd hate it if it made you any more apoplectic.