[Bored chemist]

The meson is a hadron just like the proton or neutron.

And not like the electron or positron.

[Origin]

My oscillator could be a perfect example to explain how the universe works.

Are you ever going to attempt to explain how some sort of electron and positron 'transition' has anything at all to do with your 'gravitational oscillator'.

[Kartazion (OP)]

And not like the electron or positron.

Indeed hadrons are not leptons. But as mentioned above, the oscillation is valid for all particles subject to the CP violation. Let the leptons also be through the leptogenesis.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2177-0

When I raised this idea of ​​oscillations between matter and antimatter a few years ago, it was the same thing as here. I was told it was impossible. But now mesons do it well for composite particles.

I tell you and it is the only solution. The electron oscillates well in positron. You will see what I say. I could always explain it in more detail, but for that you have to first admit to new things to explain that the universe is not so mystical as you suggest.

Are you ever going to attempt to explain how some sort of electron and positron 'transition' has anything at all to do with your 'gravitational oscillator'.

What do you know about that?

[Bored chemist]

What do you know about that?

We want to know why you imagine there's any link between them.

[Origin]

What do you know about that?

I don't know anything about a link between the two, that is why I am asking. 
What do you know about that?

[Kartazion (OP)]

We want to know why you imagine there's any link between them.

I don't know anything about a link between the two, that is why I am asking. 
What do you know about that?

The key is in gamma ray.

The result of the annihilation of electron / positron pairs from CERN or Atlas makes this clear. This link is just as well done through the Feynman diagrams. Its generated energy is much more powerful. What it proves the 'paternity' of the source of the matter (mass) by the disintegration. The question would be, why does a single pair of leptons generate so much energy? But the most important is the role of antimatter. As you can see from my oscillator, it appears to be like a balanced perpetual motion without mechanical constraints. It is precisely this side of equilibrium without mechanical constraint of the oscillation, that it causes that between kinetic and gravitation the role of antimatter becomes important. It allows the particle to simply bounce back, except that here there is no impact that occurs for the cycle of oscillation. It is like a pendulum where the ball swings and presents itself by its spin back and forth at each extremities from left to right or from top to bottom in our case.

Secondly, there is the Dirac Sea. It is the perfect representation of what becomes of the electron in the depths. Dirac predicts the antimattier and the positron.

Look at his following diagram: A genius, no?



The same particle to explain both.

Do you want me to develop more? We can discuss it quietly.

[Origin]

As you can see from my oscillator, it appears to be like a balanced perpetual motion without mechanical constraints. It is precisely this side of equilibrium without mechanical constraint of the oscillation, that it causes that between kinetic and gravitation the role of antimatter becomes important.

How does antimatter have anything to do with 'your' oscillator.

It allows the particle to simply bounce back, except that here there is no impact that occurs for the cycle of oscillation. It is like a pendulum where the ball swings and presents itself by its spin back and forth at each extremities from left to right or from top to bottom in our case.

What does that have to do with the gravitational oscillator or anti-matter.  If I drop a bowling ball down a shaft through the center of the earth to the other side the bowling ball will oscillate through the earth.  No anti-matter needed.
So I ask again:  What does anti-matter have to do with the gravitational oscillator.
 

[Kartazion (OP)]

How does antimatter have anything to do with 'your' oscillator.

What does that have to do with the gravitational oscillator or anti-matter.  If I drop a bowling ball down a shaft through the center of the earth to the other side the bowling ball will oscillate through the earth.  No anti-matter needed.
So I ask again:  What does anti-matter have to do with the gravitational oscillator.

My oscillator represents the displacement of the electron in positron like Dirac sea. I don't see why you say that.

No anti-matter needed.

Is there no need for antimatter? Yet it does exist. You're saying nonsense.

[Bored chemist]

The result of the annihilation of electron / positron pairs from CERN or Atlas makes this clear.

If anything had made it clear, we wouldn't be asking.
So what you posted there is plainly wrong.

You still need a ,meaningful explanation.

[Kartazion (OP)]

The result of the annihilation of electron / positron pairs from CERN or Atlas makes this clear.

If anything had made it clear, we wouldn't be asking.
So what you posted there is plainly wrong.

You still need a ,meaningful explanation.

Go. Now what? You are going to say that the production of gamma photon is not with it? You, you still need a ,meaningful explanation of your nonsense. With you whatever I say it's always, but always wrong. You are really not credible in my eyes. This is due to the fact that I am right on all levels. I have demonstrated to you every point that you have challenged by reason.

[Origin]

My oscillator represents the displacement of the electron in positron like Dirac sea. I don't see why you say that.

So you are saying your gravitational oscillator is 'like' an electron positron interaction?

Is there no need for antimatter? Yet it does exist. You're saying nonsense.

Please don't be dishonest. 
My quote was "If I drop a bowling ball down a shaft through the center of the earth to the other side the bowling ball will oscillate through the earth.  No anti-matter needed."

[Origin]

This is due to the fact that I am right on all levels. I have demonstrated to you every point that you have challenged by reason.

This is not true, you have utterly failed to give any meaningful explanation to your assertion that there is some sort of relationship between your gravitational oscillator and anti-matter. 

[Kartazion (OP)]

So you are saying your gravitational oscillator is 'like' an electron positron interaction?

Why interaction? It's the same particle. The particle changes from electron to positron.

Please don't be dishonest. 
My quote was "If I drop a bowling ball down a shaft through the center of the earth to the other side the bowling ball will oscillate through the earth.  No anti-matter needed."

Anything. We speak of an electron or a particle. We are talking about Dirac and antimatter. Your ball is a massive object made of atoms and particles. But yes, massive objects of classical physics do not need antimatter. Happy ?

This is not true, you have utterly failed to give any meaningful explanation to your assertion that there is some sort of relationship between your gravitational oscillator and anti-matter.

Ok. Why and by what physical constraint is it not possible to make the link between oscillator matter and antimatter?

Meson–antimeson oscillations have also formed essential ingredients in the discovery of CP violation, a delicate, yet profound feature of our universe. These phenomena have been crucial for the evolution of the Standard Model of high energy physics and have more recently provided impressive validation for its CKM dynamics. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/230956960_Matter-antimatter_oscillations_and_CP_violation_as_manifested_through_quantum_mysteries

[Origin]

Why interaction? It's the same particle. The particle changes from electron to positron.

How is that possible?  Do you have any evidence such a thing could happen?

Anything. We speak of an electron or a particle.

An electron is a particle.

We are talking about Dirac and antimatter.

No, we aren't.  You mention the word antimatter, but you have not discussed how it applies to your other thoughts in any meaningful way.

Your ball is a massive object made of atoms and particles. But yes, massive objects of classical physics do not need antimatter. Happy ?

Not really.  An electron dropped down the shaft would not involve antimatter either.

Ok. Why and by what physical constraint is it not possible to make the link between oscillator matter and antimatter?

You tell us how it is possible, it's your thread.  If it is possible what is the link?  You refuse to tell us this supposed link, why is that?
 

Meson–antimeson oscillations have also formed essential ingredients in the discovery of CP violation, a delicate, yet profound feature of our universe. These phenomena have been crucial for the evolution of the Standard Model of high energy physics and have more recently provided impressive validation for its CKM dynamics. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/230956960_Matter-antimatter_oscillations_and_CP_violation_as_manifested_through_quantum_mysteries

That's swell. 
Are you ever going to tell us how you think your gravitational oscillator relates to antimatter??

[Bored chemist]

You are going to say that the production of gamma photon is not with it?

Not with what?
Your question does not make sense

You, you still need a ,meaningful explanation of your nonsense.

I have only made two claims here
(1) your stories do not make sense
(2) you do not understand the burden of proof in science.

Which one do you want me to explain?

With you whatever I say it's always, but always wrong.

You keep saying the same wrong thing over and over again.

You are really not credible in my eyes.

I'm a professional scientist.
if I wasn't credible, I would have been sacked long ago.
You on the other hand,  are just "some guy on the internet" who posts nonsense.
So there's no reason why I should care what you think is "credible" is there?

This is due to the fact that I am right on all levels.

No
We have pointed out plenty of obvious mistakes.

I have demonstrated to you every point that you have challenged by reason.

You have not demonstrated anything.
You just repeated your baseless claim.

[Bored chemist]

The particle changes from electron to positron.

In reality, this has not been observed.

[Kartazion (OP)]

I prefer to listen to these people rather than you since UK physicists have successfully demonstrated that a subatomic particle can be transformed into an antimatter particle and back again.

The primary goal of LHCb is to investigate matter-antimatter. Thanks to this results on mesons (or Neutron–antineutron oscillations) that all elementary particles would thus be alternated between matter and antimatter.

That it.


In a second time Dragan Hajdukovic shows that the amount of matter that can be converted into antimatter (or vice versa).

Plus Dirac...

So now admitted the possibility of an oscillation between matter and antimatter like modern scientists.

[Origin]

I prefer to listen to these people rather than you since UK physicists have successfully demonstrated that a subatomic particle can be transformed into an antimatter particle and back again.

The primary goal of LHCb is to investigate matter-antimatter. Thanks to this results on mesons (or Neutron–antineutron oscillations) that all elementary particles would thus be alternated between matter and antimatter.

That it.


In a second time Dragan Hajdukovic shows that the amount of matter that can be converted into antimatter (or vice versa).

Plus Dirac...

So now admitted the possibility of an oscillation between matter and antimatter like modern scientists.

Since you have refused multiple request to show how antimatter relates to your gravitational oscillator (other than to just say it does with no explanation) and since that is allegedly what this thread is about, I will request the thread be closed.  This is pointless.

[Kartazion (OP)]

Dirac-Milne Universe https://indico.cern.ch/event/227924/contributions/1537922/attachments/375816/522825/BenoitLevy_WAG2013.pdf

Probing Gravity with antimatter https://indico.cern.ch/event/854237/contributions/3592525/attachments/2007995/3354189/Latacz_probing_gravity_with_antimatter.pdf

Gravity, antimatter and the Dirac-Milne universe https://www.researchgate.net/publication/328515703_Gravity_antimatter_and_the_Dirac-Milne_universe

[Origin]

Dirac-Milne Universe https://indico.cern.ch/event/227924/contributions/1537922/attachments/375816/522825/BenoitLevy_WAG2013.pdf

Probing Gravity with antimatter https://indico.cern.ch/event/854237/contributions/3592525/attachments/2007995/3354189/Latacz_probing_gravity_with_antimatter.pdf

Gravity, antimatter and the Dirac-Milne universe https://www.researchgate.net/publication/328515703_Gravity_antimatter_and_the_Dirac-Milne_universe

None of that answers the simple question. "how do you think your gravitational oscillator relates to antimatter?"