One step closer, one step back...

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience Archive' started by Pincho Paxton, Nov 13, 2009.

  1. Pincho Paxton Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,387
    As my other thread was locked, I can't add this to it. But it seems that science is stepping closer to what I said. However, this is a sort of side step, because they haven't narrowed it down to the smaller bubbles that I was talking about...

    BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Hints of 'time before Big Bang'
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. AlphaNumeric Fully ionized Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,702
    But you're so vague that anything could be viewed as supporting your claims. That's the problem, you offer nothing specific and concrete. And the fact you wandered into the realm of medical quackery means you go beyond being an ignorable nut to being possibly dangerous.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Pincho Paxton Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,387
    Well yes I did do that, because I wanted to show why a theory of everything is a simple theory. Like an atom is a simple device, it can't do a lot. An electron can't do a lot, and a photon can't do a lot. So DNA isn't doing a lot, it's just doing the same thing many times over. The Universe is the same thing many times over, and Cancer has to use the same physics that is available to an atom, and electron, and it can't start using them in a new way that isn't available to them. A bit like a Capacitor in electronics has limited physics, but can be used as a way to merge itself into many situations.
     
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2009
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. AlphaNumeric Fully ionized Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,702
    You can't even describe a photon interacting with an electron, cancer is utterly beyond your comprehension.
     
  8. Pincho Paxton Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,387
    Yeah, I don't even change the photon into a wave.. funny isn't it? How I use physics as a real physical environment, and you can form a wave in a Vacuum without any physics involved. Now who would be the more believable? I just think that NASA are laughing at the people that they can convince of this stuff.
     
  9. shichimenshyo Caught in the machine Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,110
    How?
     
  10. Pincho Paxton Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,387
    I have the Photon as a particle, I have the Aether as the Wave. Now you have the physics for the Photon to work with.

    Ocean wave, tide moon.

    Photon, Aether force.

    Car Brakes, Road.

    Gravity, Aether force.

    Magnetism, Aether Force.

    Dark Matter, Aether Force.

    Two Slit Experiment, Aether interactions.

    Why not have force upon Force, rather than Wave in Vacuum? Logic is the key to science, not just settling for a simple solution. It would take some force to bend a Photon into a wave. It can't just zig-zag by itself. What causes all of those sudden changes in direction?

    No wonder Quantum Physics doesn't work, you have half of the normal physics missing.
     
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2009
  11. shichimenshyo Caught in the machine Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,110
    How do you explain a car breaking on a road in mathematical terms without invoking some body of physics?

    Am I completely uninformed here?

    I thought the wave like properties of a photon were a result of quantum interactions with the photons. I am lost maybe you could explain it in more detail instead of three word sentences.
     
  12. Pincho Paxton Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,387
    How do you explain the car braking in a Vacuum in space? That is what a Photon does when it zig-zags, and that is Gravity, and that is the Big Bang. Science has missing physics, and the missing physics is the interaction with the Aether. But I am not talking science here, I am talking logic. My logic mends what is missing, and Quantum Physics is just Physics once you add the Aether. there is no more mystery involved.
     
  13. MacGyver1968 Fixin' Shit that Ain't Broke Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,028
    I think we are all in agreement on this point.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  14. Pincho Paxton Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,387
    Yes, but I'm glad that I'm not. There is something seriously wrong with it, and I think that there is a sort of faith to following the illogical methods behind it. It is almost insulting to claim that you believe in any of it. I am faced with God at one side, and Science at the other, and neither make any sense. I can only be happy for the mathematicians who managed to scramble some usable structures from what was almost completely incoherent.
     
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2009
  15. AlphaNumeric Fully ionized Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,702
    It works very very well. The fact you don't understand it doesn't mean its wrong, it just means you're a little less clever than you wish you were.

    ISo you can give me the equations for electromagnetic force and gravitational force then?

    NASA use these theories to put rockets into space, to build highly sensitive satellites to measure things in space. Quantum mechanics and relativity 'work'. It's a demonstrated fact. This doesn't mean they are perfect but they work. Nothing you have said is of any practical use. You have yet to name one thing you can model accurately.

    If you know about electrons and photons then give me the differential cross section for their interaction. Quantum mechanics can. And experiments have shown its 'working'.
     
  16. Pincho Paxton Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,387
    Ok you have maths that works from observation, great. But you have all sorts of things mixed together in your maths to get the result. If any of the hidden ingredients change, your results don't work. For example, the speed of light. You can get its speed over a distance of say 1 metre. But 1 metre doesn't exist. You are actually taking its speed through the Aether, and the Aether is only close to a constant size, but not exact. 1 meter could be 1 billion Aether bubbles on Earth, or it could be 1 single bubble in space. the speed of light would then be instant. That is actually why you have relativity. You are comparing speed through distance, rather than through Aether. with Aether being a bit different in both directions you somehow came up with time travel, when actually all you found were some fluctuations in the Aether. A map reference in the Universe is 1 Aether bubble, and it doesn't matter what size it is.

    1 bottle of coke minus 1 bottle of coke is no bottles of coke. The maths works, but I didn't say if I was taking 1 litre away from 2 litres, and if I was working in Quantum physics I might spot the difference.
     
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2009
  17. Ophiolite Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,232
    This post is clear evidence that Pincho is a sockpuppet. The post almost makes sense and is internally logical. This illustrates that the operator of the sockpuppet cannot sustain the appearance of mindnumbing stupidity indefinitely.

    I recommend everyone ignore him.
     
  18. AlphaNumeric Fully ionized Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,702
    How do you know, you don't know any of the theories I work with.

    A time or space dependent speed of light is something which has been considered and experimentally tested in observations of distant galaxies, as their spectra depend on the speed of light. The speed of light has changed less than 0.001% in the last 10 billion years, if at all.

    And relativity isn't about measuring different distances in different places. You don't have to move at all to apply a Lorentz transformation to a system and get a relativistic model. Infact, if you knew anything about the mathematics of Lorentz transforms you'd know they are defined at points, you can only compare Lorentz transforms if they are applied at the same space-time point. Well, you can compare different places but you have to be careful.

    I am absolutely certain you lack the mental facilities to understand quantum physics.
     
  19. Pincho Paxton Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,387
    There's nothing to understand, that's what I'm saying. Only the incorrect formulas makes Quantum Physics appear to be strange. So really, your reply means that you don't understand Quantum Physics.
     
  20. raggamax Banned Banned

    Messages:
    175

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    It is often said that nobody "gets" quantum physics.
     
  21. AlphaNumeric Fully ionized Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,702
    And which incorrect formulae are you referring to? Experimental checks have been done on all ones which are not 'cutting edge' and any found to fail are not made part of that area of physics.

    You and plenty of other people online talk about how particular physics equations are wrong but none of you actually have done any experiments to justify that and you ignore that the experiments which have been done have not falsified the equations. anuraganimax doesn't like E=pc but its passed experimental checks.

    I understand quantum mechanics more than more but then, unlike most, I've actually studied it. I've read books on it, I've worked through problems using it, I have a working quantitative understanding of it. I don't need or wish to read Wikipedia to get my 'understanding' about quantum mechanics, I get it direct from the horse's mouth. And in a few very small choice areas I've even advanced it a little.

    Compared to you I understand quantum mechanics. But then so would a horse at a glue factory.
     
  22. raggamax Banned Banned

    Messages:
    175
    Only in the case of a photon hotshot.
     
  23. AlphaNumeric Fully ionized Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,702
    Well which particles didn't it pass for which physicist said it should?
     

Share This Page