Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Weitter Duckss

Atom & Why did CERN fail?

83 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

JesseCuster
And the most unscientific thing done there is to publish impossible results before it was replicated or verified independently.

But one of the ways that science and peer review works is to publish results in order for others to replicate and verify (or fail to replicate and verify). As long as there's nothing obviously shoddy or wrong with the methodology, it can be published, and independently checked, replicated, etc.

If they replicated their own anomalous result it just might mean that they failed to see the flaw in their methodology, so the best thing to do is if you can't find anything wrong with your own work, publish it and see if others can verify or find fault with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
JesseCuster

And that is due to the laws by Newton: CERN does not consume enough power to accelerate anything known with any mass to anywhere near 90% of the speed of light.

The whole point behind massive particle accelerators like the LHC is to accelerate particles with mass to as ridiculously close to the speed of light as possible, far closer than 90%. According to the Wikipedia article on it article, the LHC accelerates protons to within 3 metres per second of the speed of light (about 0.99999999c). 90% of the speed of light is 30,000,000 metres per second less than the speed of light.

Where did you get the idea that it can't accelerate massive particles to anywhere near 90% of c?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Weitter Duckss

Why is it necessary to "discuss" a fact? Facts are accepted. And it is not only that the experiment has shown that there is a "God particle" (which is a pretty unscientific name for the Higgs bossom and was not created by involved scientists as far as I remember) but all theoretical calculations have shown that there must be something like that else all atoms just would fall apart... or better said: Would have never formed.

In part "Atom as it" I gave a model that solves the formation of atoms and why they will not come apart, in a very simple way. Bipolarity atoms see from of hydrogen weak links, along with its strong connection, with bipolarity (most atoms) holds atoms together and propel them into a joining . Only then can understand the need of protons that has a relationship with another proton. Interpretation of the results from the accelerator went to the wrong Sierra and it can not be fixed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
questionmark

In part "Atom as it" I gave a model that solves the formation of atoms and why they will not come apart, in a very simple way. Bipolarity atoms see from of hydrogen weak links, along with its strong connection, with bipolarity (most atoms) holds atoms together and propel them into a joining . Only then can understand the need of protons that has a relationship with another proton. Interpretation of the results from the accelerator went to the wrong Sierra and it can not be fixed.

Well, you can create any model of an atom you would like, the reality seems to be quite a different one.

Now, the right forum to convince people of them being wrong and you the only one privy "to what really is happening" are scientific conferences and discussion forums at universities. Certainly not the Space Exploration Forum on Unexplained Mysteries. Around here we seem to have little appreciation for alternative explanations when we can understand the "main stream" one without funny philosophical turns and twists.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Weitter Duckss

Well, you can create any model of an atom you would like, the reality seems to be quite a different one.

Now, the right forum to convince people of them being wrong and you the only one privy "to what really is happening" are scientific conferences and discussion forums at universities. Certainly not the Space Exploration Forum on Unexplained Mysteries. Around here we seem to have little appreciation for alternative explanations when we can understand the "main stream" one without funny philosophical turns and twists.

Forum and serves to be share ideas that have not yet arrived in official flows, because this is not an test of the known material in an educational institution for evaluation. I have the impression that in general realize themes on the the forum too seriously. Observation of reality from a different angle are in phase entertainment and checks same, and originated from the already known flows and evidence, which I see insufficient, ambiguous and often confusing.

The only problem by me the interpretation of the evidence, that on the force implanted in the the rotten foundations or long ago outdated viewpoint.

The topics discussed trying on the extremely provocative manner with a touch of humor, but not avoiding the core themes.

If constantly you turn the discussion on the already known or avoid the topic, we can not confidently conclude whether any contributions towards the improvement of existing knowledge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
badeskov

Forum and serves to be share ideas that have not yet arrived in official flows, because this is not an test of the known material in an educational institution for evaluation. I have the impression that in general realize themes on the the forum too seriously. Observation of reality from a different angle are in phase entertainment and checks same, and originated from the already known flows and evidence, which I see insufficient, ambiguous and often confusing.

The only problem by me the interpretation of the evidence, that on the force implanted in the the rotten foundations or long ago outdated viewpoint.

The topics discussed trying on the extremely provocative manner with a touch of humor, but not avoiding the core themes.

If constantly you turn the discussion on the already known or avoid the topic, we can not confidently conclude whether any contributions towards the improvement of existing knowledge.

By all means of respect, but I have no idea whatsoever what you just wrote - that was essentially outright gibberish. Maybe you should try short, simple sentences and not rely on Google translate.

Cheers,

Badeskov

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
badeskov

In part "Atom as it" I gave a model that solves the formation of atoms and why they will not come apart, in a very simple way. Bipolarity atoms see from of hydrogen weak links, along with its strong connection, with bipolarity (most atoms) holds atoms together and propel them into a joining . Only then can understand the need of protons that has a relationship with another proton. Interpretation of the results from the accelerator went to the wrong Sierra and it can not be fixed.

You obviously don't really know what you are talking about. Can I suggest you read up on physics before you start making up "theories" with no basis in reality?

Cheers,

Badeskov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Weitter Duckss

You obviously don't really know what you are talking about. Can I suggest you read up on physics before you start making up "theories" with no basis in reality?

Cheers,

Badeskov

Obviously, you know. Undeceive me cons evidence. Generalized statement does not help. Tell the for example:

same quantity of mass can not carry the same charge, electrons have a specific mass and specify why.

It would understand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.