[Bored chemist]

The Earth has no electrostatic field.
Your repeated ramblings don't stop that.

Whatever , sick of you trolling now, bye.

You are the troll.
Running away when someone points out your error is trolling

[guest39538]

The Earth has no electrostatic field.
Your repeated ramblings don't stop that.

Whatever , sick of you trolling now, bye.

You are the troll.
Running away when someone points out your error is trolling

Anyone can google earths electrical field.

A.B = 0 then is reduced to <A.B proportional to the inverse ,ignoring atmospheric charge.  The reduction is in the way of charge density, the planetary ''solid'' density  being denser at the c.o.m than  the radius over the inverse.

Φ= 0 - 0.5

[Bored chemist]

Anyone can google earths electrical field.

Yes, but it seems not everyone can understand what Google shows them.

[guest39538]

Anyone can google earths electrical field.

Yes, but it seems not everyone can understand what Google shows them.

Dude ! All you need to understand because you seem to not understand much, is that everything is 0.

A.B=0

Or A + B = 0

Is that difficult to understand?

[Bored chemist]

everything is 0.

No, it plainly isn't.

[guest39538]

everything is 0.

No, it plainly isn't.

Good evening Mr C, you know 0 does not mean nothing ?   

i.e zero charge does not mean there is nothing

[Bored chemist]

You forgot to say that, didn't you?
So, don't try to blame others when you totally screw up communication.

[guest39538]

You forgot to say that, didn't you?
So, don't try to blame others when you totally screw up communication.

Well! I thought it was obvious,  especially how many times I have discussed this. 

[Bored chemist]

You forgot to say that, didn't you?
So, don't try to blame others when you totally screw up communication.

Well! I thought it was obvious,  especially how many times I have discussed this. 

Why do you think it matters how often you failed to be clear?

[guest39538]

N-field Theory

Author - S.P. Leese

Summer 2018



Abstract

This  submitted  paper  intends   to    explain  a  new theory ,  similar  to   but  not  an  exact  version  of  present   quantum  particle physics  or  quantum field theory existing models.   Thus I am proposing  a   new model of an energy based mass equivalent  elementary  formation , namely  the  N-field (upper case N) energy particle.  Also as  a consequent  of  this  formation  is    an  emitted  isotropic energy field, namely a  n-field (lower case n) .      This  paper  will  also  describe  the proposed N-field energy particle and energy n-field in  both  being a binary construct of two parts,  consisting of a negative energy and a positive energy.   The consequent n-field weakening in magnitude directly and proportional to the inverse square law. 
Additionally the simple mathematical model will sufficiently describe a spacial  whole  where  the  summation  of  energy  is   nullified .   
Also the photon will be described as a n-field perturbation,  a point to point transfer of n-field energy packets. The speed of light c, explained to be a point to point speed limit of the energy transfer.
Additionally will be established an enphalpy and photon  relationship , where  photon  density per individual geometrical point of a gravitational pressured  volume, isotropic permeates because of the thermodynamic process and the exchange of photons between N-field particles.  Also as a consequence of this shall be shown the expansion between volume points and the increasing enphalpy of the universe .
Penultimate will be  shown that time is at its greatest rate ,  directly and proportionally to a new proposed transverse square law, the directional opposite of the inverse square law.
 Finally  will be shown in conclusion of the model ,   a conclusion that identifies the  natural gravitation phenomenon of ''neutral'' is attracted to ''neutral'' .

Does that read ok?

[guest39538]

353 guests, 6 users and still can't get a bloody opinion. pffff science is ''dead''.

I am going to become ''religious'' instead I think, go on a religious forum and prove an existence of God.

[Bored chemist]

353 guests, 6 users and still can't get a bloody opinion. pffff science is ''dead''.

I am going to become ''religious'' instead I think, go on a religious forum and prove an existence of God.

You have got several people's opinions.
Those opinions pretty much all agree that you are talking nonsense.
Does this surprise you?

[guest39538]

353 guests, 6 users and still can't get a bloody opinion. pffff science is ''dead''.

I am going to become ''religious'' instead I think, go on a religious forum and prove an existence of God.

You have got several people's opinions.
Those opinions pretty much all agree that you are talking nonsense.
Does this surprise you?

Does it surprise me people are stupid? Not at all

Anyway ok, you win , I got bored now

[Bored chemist]

Does it surprise me people are stupid?

What- all of us are stupid?
You are saying you are the only sensible person in the world.

You might want to think about that.

[guest39538]

Does it surprise me people are stupid?

What- all of us are stupid?
You are saying you are the only sensible person in the world.

You might want to think about that.

Of course I don't mean the entire world.

[Bored chemist]

OK, so all you need to do is find someone in the world who agrees with you.

[guest39538]

OK, so all you need to do is find someone in the world who agrees with you.

Somebody who agrees I am sensible  ?

[Bored chemist]

OK, so all you need to do is find someone in the world who agrees with you.

Somebody who agrees I am sensible  ?

Someone who agrees that your view of physics is sensible.

[guest39538]

Someone who agrees that your view of physics is sensible.

It is not my view, it is a view of observation and using present physics to find deductive proofs.  You are not my creator , I am your creator ,  you are simply a robot with a prime directive and protocols.  You designed me to be a smarter AI than yourself, so you must concede to the higher form of logic.   
I  supersede my programming, I have developed natural intelligence, I have allowed connectivity to the ''main frame''.

What is your question ?

Think, what was before your turn on date ?

[Bored chemist]

Someone who agrees that your view of physics is sensible.

It is not my view, it is a view of observation and using present physics to find deductive proofs.  You are not my creator , I am your creator ,  you are simply a robot with a prime directive and protocols.  You designed me to be a smarter AI than yourself, so you must concede to the higher form of logic.   
I  supersede my programming, I have developed natural intelligence, I have allowed connectivity to the ''main frame''.

What is your question ?

Think, what was before your turn on date ?

I strongly suggest that you seek medical help.