0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Vern's theory is inconsistent with observations and, therefore, wrong.
"Measurements do not find the electromagnetic bounderies of the particles."Please define "electromagnetic bounderies".Quantum mechanics makes it rather difficult to define the size of anything on this scale but I think you are still ignoring the observations.
Vern, I mentioned creating a paper that will take the square of the shells rule mainstream. This is what I predicted for the Square of the Shells rule. This fits with the Standard Model, and Guage Theories:
I'm old now and damn near senile. Or so it seems to me when answers don't come as fast as they used to!
You have finally been able to work out the spatial sizes for these particles, I waited years for you to come to an understanding that the from an electromagnetic gravitation perspective, the Electron is much bigger in size than the Proton and Neutron.
They have to use high energy electrons to probe small things- that's the uncertainty principle for you. Does that mean your ideas are untestable?
It's a bit more like saying that if I throw baseballs at a car and see where I need to throw them to get them to bounce off I can work out the shape of the car to an accuracy of roughly the size of a baseball. If I uses spacehoppers I can only tell the shape of teh car to the nearest "spacehopper".
I can tell a car from a truck using either projectile, but I would struggle to tell two sorts of small car apart.
You are saying that my use of baseballs is not permitted because they have too much energy and so they bounce off something inside the car, or break the windows or some such.
If you can't answer that then you have entered the world of theology. You are saying one thing is bigger than another but it doesn't look like it is, because it changes when you look at it.I don't see that as science.
Incidentally, water is nearly incompressible so it doesn't change density. Also, since it's a conservative field (with the much-loved caveat that we ignore viscosity) if moving towards it becomes harder then moving away becomes easier. Since staying still takes no energy there must be a net force acting away. That's not what happens. Throw a pebble into a pond and you will see the leaves bob up and down, but they are not moved away by the ripples.