[opportunity (OP)]

Any ideas? And how.

[guest39538]

Any ideas? And how.

Hello opp

New , gives  your answer opp.  A new theory does not need to have any old theory in it , but it does have to use workable physics which is old facts as opposed to old theory.

[Kryptid]

There is no requirement for a new theory to bear any particular degree of similarity to the old theory it is attempting to replace. It just needs to explain the existing data better than the old theory does and, more importantly, to be falsifiable and to have survived being falsified by critical experimentation. Reproducibility of those experimental results by independent groups is also important as is the statistical significance of those results.

[guest39538]

There is no requirement for a new theory to bear any particular degree of similarity to the old theory it is attempting to replace. It just needs to explain the existing data better than the old theory does and, more importantly, to be falsifiable and to have survived being falsified by critical experimentation. Reproducibility of those experimental results by independent groups is also important as is the statistical significance of those results.

It just needs to explain the existing data better than the old theory does

I try that and people say it is nonsense , oh well.

[Bored chemist]

I try that and people say it is nonsense , oh well.

Your "explanations" typically took the form of bad maths or bad cartoons, and they didn't explain anything.
It's because you are a useless troll.

[guest39538]

I try that and people say it is nonsense , oh well.

Your "explanations" typically took the form of bad maths or bad cartoons, and they didn't explain anything.
It's because you are a useless troll.

Oh my buttons, like I said, lets see what you have got, I started a thread.

[Bored chemist]

I started a thread.

You started many.
And you carried lots of them on when you should have accepted that they were nonsense.