Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Atom & Why did CERN fail?

atom & why did cern fail?

  • Please log in to reply
82 replies to this topic

#1    Weitter Duckss

Weitter Duckss

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 190 posts
  • Joined:11 Jun 2014

Posted 04 July 2014 - 05:51 AM

The Atoms - what are they?
This is a subject about which everything is known. The atom (of hydrogen, H) is a nucleus, consisting of a proton, as well as an electron which circles around the nucleus, thus creating an electron cloud.

Look on the Internet: The atom of hydrogen between powerful magnets (quantum physics US)

The protons and neutrons, as well as the electrons, which can all exist independently under certain conditions, have been isolated in laboratories. So, where is the problem?

It has been concluded by splitting the protons (as well as neutrons and electrons) in the particle colliders that a proton consists of the smaller particles, named quarks (three quarks for Muster Mark). The first problems appeared at this point. A proton would not split into three quarks, practically without an exception (only a few exceptions out of the billions of events have occurred). When a proton is bombarded by an electron in the particle colliders, the three peaks appear (+, - and 0) and these are the quarks. I will now deliberately evade the discussions about the entire series of the so-called particles, which have a very short life span (Lambda-Hyperion, 2.51 x 10-10 sec., sigma-hyperion +0.81, - 1.65 x 10-10 sec., and 0 ~10-14 sec., and so on – only the muons have a somewhat longer existence, 2,2 x 10-6 sec.). The reasons are obviously clear, here we don’t talk about the independently-occurring particles and therefore they can’t join the interrelations in nature.

The most important fact obtained by the colliders is the existence of the stable particles (neutrino, electron, proton with a variation of neutron and photon-energy) and that they participate in the processes of creation. The proton charge can, with the help of muons, be interpreted as bipolar, because the positive charge of Earth attracts only those muons occurring in the collisions of radiation waves with the particles inside the atmosphere of Earth (the disintegration of particles).
The next important fact is that they (protons and neutrons) at the end always split, after a few pauses, into electrons, neutrinos and photons (energy) and the electrons into neutrinos.

Bipolarity of particles (I will not go further from hydrogen here) is discovered through the non-existence of the free particles – they only exist joined into pairs (H2). A particle that has only a positive (or negative) charge – or in other words, a single charge – can not attract another particle with a similar value. Only the opposite (different) charges attract: the positive part of a hydrogen particle attracts the negative part of another hydrogen particle and then they exist as a pair. Why are these not the electrons? In that case, the joining would end as proton  (nucleus) with an electron, or more of them, and there would not be the need to join together proton with another proton.

Since a proton is by its mass 1 836 times bigger than an electron, it is obvious that they join together to create a larger quantity of the negative charge – that value is above the mass (or charge) of 90 electrons.

By observing the split of proton we can conclude that it consists of a series of neutrinos, with energy as a carrier. It represents a thread made by a few million of these particles and a large number of electrons. That thread is huddled up because of its length and the imbalance of charges at its ends. It has a dominantly positive charge, with an insignificant negative charge. Namely this imbalance is a basis of the particle joining inside the visible matter. The electrons and neutrinos constantly circle around it, because of its dominantly positive charge. By joining of a proton with these particles (two electrons and two neutrinos, with some energy), a neutron is created. It is not permanently stable – only for some 17 minutes. The next round of joining is the opening of the threads of neutrons and protons and in that way forming the structures of the following, more complex atoms.

The forming of neutrino itself (a matter with charge) occurs as a result of different speeds of energy movement in the rotation of the universe. The speeds increase from the center of universe towards its surface. A friction is caused by the work of particles, which is similar to the ionization of particles inside the atmosphere of Earth, occurring at the times of turbulences and different drifts.

The joining (growing) is constant and it has an upper level of sustainability in a natural surrounding (from polonium to uranium). Even though the joining occurs continuously, the particles can not achieve the higher value than this. That the joining occurs continuously, we can tell by the radiation (dispersal) of the biggest atoms. It is a process of balancing, achieved by discharging the surplus, made by the new incoming matter (smaller particles).

The age of some celestial objects (planets, satellites, asteroids…) is measured by the higher representation of the upper elements, those with higher quantities of protons and neutrons inside the atoms. That is only one factor, though. Therefore, we can with certainty expect that these elements don’t occur in significant quantities (related to the mass of an object) on the Moon, on Mars, on the asteroids, on the comets…


Why did CERN fail?

Nothing was standing on their way. They were alone, independent; about ten billion of euro were invested in their work; they employed the best scientists of the world. Success was guaranteed to them; the road to it had been opened and covered with rose petals, thrown before them by mass media. They felt themselves omnipotent and unstoppable on their way to the greatest glory on Earth and self-presentation.

They believed in success so hard that they ignored the warnings received from Zadar, that everything had been founded on the wrong basis. All the books of the world, except for that of Zadar, supported their work and competed one against the other in sucking up to them, hoping at least some of the future glory would be bestowed upon them, too. What went wrong?

The problem had existed already since the time of the formation of quantum physics. A number of laboratory successes followed one after the other, but the presentations of those successes, through explaining the meaning of the achieved results, had been ending up disasters.

At first, Bohr model appeared, as a misfortunate presentation. It was upgraded by having copied the model of Solar system onto the world of atoms. That way, the heliocentric system of atoms was founded and, as such, it remained unchanged as a greatest truth and achievement. The atom core consisted of proton and neutron little spheres, which were surrounded by the belt of electrons, the speed of which was 30 000 km/sec. At the end of the previous millennium they even started to destroy the chemistry by imposing the idea that the electrons, instead of valence bond, connected the atoms and molecules. (Valence bond is not true either, but it explains chemical processes well.)
Interpreting the events from colliders, they moved themselves even more away from the field of reality. They wished for the impossible by convincing themselves and the others that a broken-down particle, as a consequence of using high energies, could be able to accrete again and thus create a new, unforeseen kind of matter. That was set as an absolute truth and a basis of experiments, even though there was not a single pause (which they proclaimed particles) that was stable for more than a millionth part of a second. The further they continued with particle collisions, these pauses were ever shorter and shorter.

Generally speaking, from that time till today, a number of pathetic conclusions entered science, like for example: Universe hatched out from an egg (it was an attempt to please the Church – even the idea itself was brought about by a priest); some of the theory of relativity’s suggestions introduced black holes and singularity (Einstein himself was against such ideas); then they introduced the Hubble constant of spreading the Universe; then, instead of rotation, they introduced the fourth dimension – instead of making three dimensions more complex, the Universe became flat and lost its volume. Entropy dominated the Universe; it was suddenly forced to be the same from its origin or at least from the period when “visible matter prevailed over the dark matter”…

All doubts soon disappeared, because all who were trying to think differently were gone or marginalized. Under such conditions, nothing else could have even been expected in CERN. Peter Higgs himself said: “If this was not physics, I would not know what it was then?” He was convinced in its correctness, even though there were completely opposing evidence in the experiment.

Instead of sobering up, there is only silence; only some Russian scientific magazines gloat over the situation. Nevertheless, all who have contributed to this failure, continue to receive fabulous salaries. Their colleagues in our country (Croatia) continue to transfer millions to “poor” Swiss and their “underpaid” scientists for membership in that failed project. Even more, they are amazed that some scientists in Italy and Russia are facing trials for wrong estimations and, except payments from us and the Swiss, do not get paid anymore to spend billions of tax payers’ money in vain.


#2    Kenemet

Kenemet

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 647 posts
  • Joined:13 Apr 2014

Posted 04 July 2014 - 06:08 AM

View PostWeitter Duckss, on 04 July 2014 - 05:51 AM, said:

The Atoms - what are they?
This is a subject about which everything is known.

I respectfully disagree, as would scientists who work on atoms and subatomic particles.

Also -- your conclusions don't seem to match your evidence.


#3    Rlyeh

Rlyeh

    Omnipotent Entity

  • Member
  • 9,195 posts
  • Joined:01 Jan 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The sixth circle

  • Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. - Terry Pratchett

Posted 04 July 2014 - 06:08 AM

View PostWeitter Duckss, on 04 July 2014 - 05:51 AM, said:

By observing the split of proton we can conclude that it consists of a series of neutrinos
What is the source of this statement? Neutrinos don't carry a charge.

As astronomy doesn't support your "rotating universe", you've moved on to QM, which doesn't support it either.

Edited by Rlyeh, 04 July 2014 - 06:12 AM.


#4    Valdemar the Great

Valdemar the Great

    Mainly Spherical in Shape

  • Member
  • 25,122 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:there

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 04 July 2014 - 06:26 AM

Fail? I thought they discovered the God Particle, didn't they? Admittedly, it seems to have gone rather quiet since then and the discovery of the God Particle doesn't seem to have resulted in a very noticeable paradigm shift in our view of the world, but I'm sure Mr. Higgs or Mr. Boson are satisfied.

Life is a hideous business, and from the background behind what we know of it peer daemoniacal hints of truth which make it sometimes a thousandfold more hideous.

H. P. Lovecraft.


:cat:


#5    Weitter Duckss

Weitter Duckss

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 190 posts
  • Joined:11 Jun 2014

Posted 05 July 2014 - 02:35 PM

All the topics I wanted to discuss topics within the Rotation of the universe, including the relationships within the universe.
For neutrinos with almost 100% certainty can be concluded that the particles with charge and mass. Time will tell. The existence of a mass is inseparable from the existence of charge unless it is not "dark matter".
If no charge can not be interest to joining.


#6    Valdemar the Great

Valdemar the Great

    Mainly Spherical in Shape

  • Member
  • 25,122 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:there

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 05 July 2014 - 04:09 PM

View PostWeitter Duckss, on 05 July 2014 - 02:35 PM, said:

All the topics I wanted to discuss topics within the Rotation of the universe, including the relationships within the universe.
For neutrinos with almost 100% certainty can be concluded that the particles with charge and mass. Time will tell. The existence of a mass is inseparable from the existence of charge unless it is not "dark matter".
If no charge can not be interest to joining.
oh i see, well, yes, can't argue with that.

Life is a hideous business, and from the background behind what we know of it peer daemoniacal hints of truth which make it sometimes a thousandfold more hideous.

H. P. Lovecraft.


:cat:


#7    sepulchrave

sepulchrave

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,786 posts
  • Joined:19 Apr 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 06 July 2014 - 09:42 AM

View PostWeitter Duckss, on 05 July 2014 - 02:35 PM, said:

The existence of a mass is inseparable from the existence of charge unless it is not "dark matter".
If no charge can not be interest to joining.
If you can prove this, please do so... I am certain you will receive a Nobel prize for your efforts.


#8    spacecowboy342

spacecowboy342

    Traveler of both time and space

  • Member
  • 4,111 posts
  • Joined:22 Aug 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

  • I shall now proceed to entangle the entire area

Posted 06 July 2014 - 04:01 PM

I thought electrons could be separated from their charge?


#9    Noteverythingisaconspiracy

Noteverythingisaconspiracy

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,429 posts
  • Joined:31 Dec 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:A very small country north of Germany

  • "An open mind is like an open door, unless you're careful anything might get in." Sir Wearer of Hats

Posted 06 July 2014 - 06:01 PM

View PostWeitter Duckss, on 05 July 2014 - 02:35 PM, said:

All the topics I wanted to discuss topics within the Rotation of the universe, including the relationships within the universe.
For neutrinos with almost 100% certainty can be concluded that the particles with charge and mass. Time will tell. The existence of a mass is inseparable from the existence of charge unless it is not "dark matter".
If no charge can not be interest to joining.

So do neutrons have a charge ?
Or do they have no mass ?

"People will generally accept fact as truth only if the fact agree with what they already believe"
Andy Rooney

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and im not sure about the former"
Albert Einstein

#10    Weitter Duckss

Weitter Duckss

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 190 posts
  • Joined:11 Jun 2014

Posted 06 July 2014 - 07:51 PM

Leave the Nobel, this is a forum, fun. Examines the reality imposed. Do not defend strangers understanding at all costs, including my understanding. We are checking whether we can arrange interpreting evidence in an acceptable manner within framework of physics. This is just my view as a response to all the nonsense stuffed within physics.
Penrose: that there is no censorshipwe would have seen terrible things in the universe. After of this Statement, and you do not want to question some beliefs?


#11    Waspie_Dwarf

Waspie_Dwarf

    Space Cadet

  • 32,181 posts
  • Joined:03 Mar 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bexleyheath, Kent, UK

  • We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.

    Oscar Wilde

Posted 06 July 2014 - 08:29 PM

View PostWeitter Duckss, on 06 July 2014 - 07:51 PM, said:

and you do not want to question some beliefs?
This is the science section, belief is irrelevant, it is evidence that counts.

Your posts are long winded and make little sense. Worse, from a scientific point of view, they present no supporting evidence at all. They are just full of your beliefs.

And so I repeat, this is the science section, belief is irrelevant.

"Space is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-boggingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the street to the chemist, but that's just peanuts to space." - The Hitch-Hikers Guide to the Galaxy - Douglas Adams 1952 - 2001

Posted Image
Click on button

#12    Imaginarynumber1

Imaginarynumber1

    I am not an irrational number

  • Member
  • 4,870 posts
  • Joined:22 Mar 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ohio

Posted 07 July 2014 - 02:44 AM

View PostWeitter Duckss, on 05 July 2014 - 02:35 PM, said:

For neutrinos with almost 100% certainty can be concluded that the particles with charge and mass. Time will tell. The existence of a mass is inseparable from the existence of charge unless it is not "dark matter".
If no charge can not be interest to joining.


What?!

NO.
Do you even science?

Edited by Imaginarynumber1, 07 July 2014 - 02:44 AM.

"A cat has nine lives. For three he plays, for three he strays, and for the last three he stays."


July 17th, 2008 (Full moon the next night)

RAPTORS! http://www.unexplain...pic=233151&st=0


#13    aquatus1

aquatus1

    Forum Divinity

  • 19,484 posts
  • Joined:05 Mar 2004
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 07 July 2014 - 03:23 AM

I'm a little fuzzy on what this failure of CERN's is supposed to be.


#14    Weitter Duckss

Weitter Duckss

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 190 posts
  • Joined:11 Jun 2014

Posted 07 July 2014 - 06:12 AM

In 95% of the processed data not found none acceptable event. When the whole world is given up, they found two
  different events for which they say it is. What is this relevant? As to are first time intentional "wrong". Remember: Neutrinos travel faster than light!
What science can with "two" stray different events? What we are smarter after having spent billions €?


#15    Likely Guy

Likely Guy

    Undecided, mostly.

  • Member
  • 5,002 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Likely, Canada

  • I might have been born yesterday but, I've been up all night.

Posted 07 July 2014 - 06:27 AM

View PostWeitter Duckss, on 07 July 2014 - 06:12 AM, said:

In 95% of the processed data not found none acceptable event. When the whole world is given up, they found two
  different events for which they say it is. What is this relevant? As to are first time intentional "wrong". Remember: Neutrinos travel faster than light!
What science can with "two" stray different events? What we are smarter after having spent billions €?

Perhaps you can supply evidence, or at least a link to this assertion.

I realize that English may not be your first language, but you're making your train of thought exceedingly difficult to follow. I'm sorry.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users