Serious Crackpottery

Anything can be discussed, tempers may flare.
This forum has no connection with CERN, the LHC or my site.

Moderator: CharmQuark

Forum rules
Any controversial topic can be discussed. Freedom of expression is encouraged. The scientific validity of things posted in this forum may stray from reality quite wildly and the reader is advised to keep that in mind. Please refrain from bad language and DO NOT get overly abusive with other members. You MUST post in English. It is OK to have fiercely intense debate. This forum has no connection with CERN, the LHC or my site. The views here do not represent the forum's views or my views in any way. It is meant as a place to debate or discuss subjects that may create heated debate. Almost no moderation will occur in this forum at all.
User avatar
chelle
Posts: 738
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 11:32 am
Location: XL - BXL - B

Re: Serious Crackpottery

Post by chelle » Mon Apr 19, 2010 7:34 pm

oxodoes wrote:Nevertheless every idea deserves attention,
Yay!
oxodoes wrote:so lets have it tested:
I just did, and it past the test with brio, no seriously it fails gloriously, this idea was no good, oops.

But if I may say, for the mechanism of a nucleus with electrons on the outside it might pass the test, any suggestions ... if it rotates like a mixer it could hit easily an alpha particle out of the box, like in the Rutherford test :)
Dance, even if you have nowhere to do it but your own living room.
Wear Sunscreen by Baz Luhrmann - Mary Schmich

Kasuha
Posts: 570
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2009 1:22 pm

Re: Serious Crackpottery

Post by Kasuha » Mon Apr 19, 2010 8:01 pm

Rutheford did not just notice that alpha particles are deflected at various angles and some even back. He in fact measured distribution of different deflection angles and found that it corresponds to atomic nucleus at currently known size and electrostatic properties (because alpha particles are not only deflected by directly hitting the nucleus but also and more often by just passing by and interacting through electric charge).
So ... it sure is possible that atomic nucleus is way different and it works the known way by pure coincidence but there were so far no clues that it might be the case.

oxodoes
Posts: 66
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2010 10:26 pm
Contact:

Re: Serious Crackpottery

Post by oxodoes » Mon Apr 19, 2010 10:05 pm

Chelle wrote:But if I may say, for the mechanism of a nucleus with electrons on the outside it might pass the test, any suggestions ...
I don't see how your model can group quarks into neutrons and protons in heavier nuclei. But this is necessary in order to explain the strong force (and in turn radioactivity).

User avatar
chriwi
LHCPortal Guru
Posts: 403
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2009 1:19 pm
Location: Stuttgart Germany
Contact:

Re: Serious Crackpottery

Post by chriwi » Tue Apr 20, 2010 7:46 am

oxodoes wrote:Nevertheless every idea deserves attention,
I totally agree with this and think I already wrote something like that in this thread before (maybe it was also one of the others ("sparks" or "errors of physics")).
Maybe I only went a little bit too far based on what is wrote only in this thread, but I also had in mind what was said by Chelle in the other 2 threads.

My opinion is:
1. Every idea deserves attention
2. the one who brought up an idea should bring some aditional info to make it understandable and likely to be helpful to understand reality better than other models befoe.
3. Others should not be requested to proof or disproof a new idea only to continue with other tasks (like making LHC experiments)
4. someone who has a new idea and belives based on this idea somthing what otrhers do might be dangerous sould try to bring proof to make his view more likely and make the others think twice, but not only request them to stop just on chance or even try to sabotage them or encourage others to do so.
5. It is nice of others to discuss new ideas, but they should not be requested to do so and also not be hindered to do other things without a reasonable proof comming from the person who brougth up the possibilityof danger or others who are willing to examine the new idea.

Most of this has to do more with the other threads, so what doesnt apply here might not be used for this thread.

Actually I had to read all activ threads this morning first to find that I wrote what I wrote before in this one, I usuallycling not so much to threads but more to a group of peole I am discussing with.
bye

chriwi

User avatar
chelle
Posts: 738
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 11:32 am
Location: XL - BXL - B

Re: Serious Crackpottery

Post by chelle » Tue Apr 20, 2010 11:08 am

chriwi wrote:
oxodoes wrote:My opinion is:
1. ...
2. ...
3. ...
4. ...
5. ...
These seem to be your rules that you want to apply, that's oké but the rules of the forum are written by the real boss here and they are pretty simple, have a look in the yellow banner above this page.

Similarly to those rules there is in this sand barge called the universe, actually only one basic rule, and that is the first rule of Newton, something that isn't stopped will keep on moving, I would suggest to think about this a few times and not only in regard of the lhc.

Now have a look at my (8) wich is a snake that bites its tail, the circle is completed, in other words a movement that isn't stopped and being pushed, in words of relativity it stands still. This formation can be formed when a series of moving particle flips over, and start to behave like the cyclist in the Belgian Tourniquet. And because of the (8) formation there is a natural compositional tension preventing the particles from moving outwards because they would get in contact with resistance if they go inwards the same thing would happen. They 'slipstream' each other, bundling their forces, working as a drill. When this formation is completed it can start to rotate on its self, in a sand barge, it generates 2 opposite fields that are 180° shifted that IS magnetism.

I will come back to the specific questions from "exodoes" a bit later on, just give this idea some time, and let it "sink in".

Image

Btw in a refence to the other topic, how far and long would a jet, with a non perfect (8) formation, be able to drill and penetrate or break other (8)'s before it has lost it's energy?
Last edited by chelle on Tue Apr 20, 2010 11:18 am, edited 1 time in total.
Dance, even if you have nowhere to do it but your own living room.
Wear Sunscreen by Baz Luhrmann - Mary Schmich

Kasuha
Posts: 570
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2009 1:22 pm

Re: Serious Crackpottery

Post by Kasuha » Tue Apr 20, 2010 11:18 am

Chelle wrote:
oxodoes wrote:My opinion is:
These seem to be your rules that you want to apply, that's oké but the rules of the forum are written by the real boss here and they are pretty simple, have a look in the yellow banner above this page.
Wordplay much?
Chelle wrote:Btw in a refence to the other topic, how far and long would a jet, with a non perfect (8) formation, be able to drill and penetrate or break other (8)'s before it has lost it's energy?
Depends on what you understand under word "jet" in this case. It looks like you have great tendency to quietly replace words in sentences giving them different meaning and then pretend nothing happened.

User avatar
chelle
Posts: 738
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 11:32 am
Location: XL - BXL - B

Re: Serious Crackpottery

Post by chelle » Tue Apr 20, 2010 2:12 pm

Kasuha wrote:It looks like you have great tendency to quietly replace words in sentences giving them different meaning and then pretend nothing happened.
Yes, my words have been interchanged, but try to listen to the song I'm singing, it's still the same tune.
Dance, even if you have nowhere to do it but your own living room.
Wear Sunscreen by Baz Luhrmann - Mary Schmich

User avatar
mrgumby
Posts: 266
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 2:53 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Serious Crackpottery

Post by mrgumby » Wed Apr 28, 2010 6:30 am

We can agree on that....

Same old song, same old chorus, same old tune, ho hum...

and it still doesn't rhyme or scan or make sense.....

Post Reply