Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

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.
Anitusar
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 5:26 pm

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by Anitusar » Wed Dec 30, 2009 1:20 pm

MagneticTrap wrote:
Stephen wrote: Don't you think it would be pointless for them to earn money they would never get a chance to use? Do you suppose all the scientists in the world have suicidal tendencies?
Anitusar wrote: 1.) They WHAT? How are they planning on using the LHC to make money ??? And why should it go to the administration?
Shadowdraxx wrote: well im still baffled why anyone would want to intentionally kill themselves and their family x the amount of ppl working in the LHC that DONT work for Cern...
1. There are patent documents (I read several times about that, but don’t remember the sources now) how to catch holes and use them as energy sources. If those patent documents were written by CERN workers, then the administration of CERN have the ruling rights on that inventions.
It is correct that there is patent. It belongs to Mr. Stöcker from the Frankfurt University. He is not an employee of CERN. The LHC would only prove, that his method would work but nothing more. All the money created from this would go to Mr. Stöcker! In order to make some money, one has to build a "relict converter", which is described in the patent. So, no money for CERN!

Stephen
Posts: 496
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 11:09 pm

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by Stephen » Wed Dec 30, 2009 3:14 pm

MagneticTrap wrote:Do you know, who is Fred Hoyle? Who had received his Nobel Prize? Who had rejected sir Hoyle from science? There were thousands scientists, such as Fred Hoyle. But they were dismissed or thrown out. Now we have Religious Dogma instead Science. We must be and will be punished for that Crime. Earth will be exploded by bigbangers with the “scientific purpose”, - to look at the firsts microseconds of Big Bang.
That's an interesting claim on your part. I searched his name on Google, and I'm puzzled as to why you included him as an argument in your favor. Sir Fred Hoyle never received a noble prize, but so what? Neither did Stephen Hawking. Maybe he really deserved to win a prize, but cases like that happen all the time. It doesn't mean that scientists can't be respected without winning this prize. Besides, Hoyle was honored and received other awards for his contributions to science. Saying he was rejected by the science community is not true - his theory was respected by many people who supported his model of "steady state", which was actually the main other theory along side the big bang. This theory lost popularity because of observational discoveries like distribution of "young galaxies" and cosmic microwave background.

The big bang theory is the most popular theory because so far its' description of the universe is the most accurate of all theories, including your model of rotational movement. Scientists are the exact opposite of people who are fixed on certain positions. They are fascinated by the universe and are quite happy to discover new things. If you would search scientists views on the Higgs Boson, you will find that a lot of people will be more thrilled if it wasn't found, because it would mean the standard model is not complete and new physics are needed. The big bang might be the most popular theory today (because it has the most evidence, and not because scientists are madly in love with the idea of a big explosion), but no one is ruling out the possibility of a more accurate theory taking its' place. No one is saying there aren't unexplained things or some strange phenomenons that don't seem to fit it with our current understanding, so your claim of them being fixed on their positions is false.

Sir Hoyle was an educated scientist who had a physics degree, similar to those you laugh at. He studied at Cambridge and worked in the science field his whole life. Did you study in Cambridge? I doubt it. I talked to many physicists (who aren't related to CERN or LHC) who have nothing to gain, and none of their safety explanations is based on the authenticity of the big bang theory. These people have families and love their lives, and there isn't a chance in the world they would keep their mouth shut if they disagreed with CERN.

Stephen
Posts: 496
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 11:09 pm

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by Stephen » Wed Dec 30, 2009 3:26 pm

Ivan, is this the thing you're afraid of?
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/top ... tic-dipole

User avatar
tswsl1989
LHCPortal Guru
Posts: 166
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2009 2:22 pm
Location: Swansea, Wales, UK
Contact:

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by tswsl1989 » Wed Dec 30, 2009 4:44 pm

No, what Ivan is afraid of is some form of magnetic anomaly analogous to a black hole: An anomaly where the magnetic field applied to a dipole exceeds a specified value and (presumably) results in the collapse of the dipole. Apparently this thing then eats protons

I'm sure he'll post a better explanation.


*goes back to revision*

Stephen
Posts: 496
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 11:09 pm

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by Stephen » Wed Dec 30, 2009 4:54 pm

Yeah he said so, it's just that he keeps talking about monopoles and dipoles so I'm not convinced of his specific fear.

User avatar
MagneticTrap
Posts: 162
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 2:56 pm
Location: Ukraine Crimea Feodosia
Contact:

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by MagneticTrap » Thu Dec 31, 2009 9:02 am

tswsl1989 wrote:No, what Ivan is afraid of is some form of magnetic anomaly analogous to a black hole: An anomaly where the magnetic field applied to a dipole exceeds a specified value and (presumably) results in the collapse of the dipole. Apparently this thing then eats protons
Yes. In the ordinary vacuum different virtual particles constantly appear and disappear. In the bottom figure we can see the appearance of electro-positron pair in the point A and their annihilation in the point B.
Image
In order to transform virtual pair into real pair we must spent energy. On the next figure we can see the x-boson, consisting from two fermions, particle and antiparticle.
Image
If the energy of p-p collision at collider is sufficient, we can create an exited region in vacuum containing some quantity of such x-bosons. They are oriented in the same direction and have the superconductive and ferromagnetic properties.
Image
If proton enters into the field of such exited vacuum it can be ruined onto x-boson and positron. X-boson will be captured by magnetic hole and the hole will become bigger per one x-boson. Positron will fly away and annihilate there with some electron. The rate of matter destruction will be growing. The Earth will undergo the collaptical explosion in a period from 1000 seconds to 1000 days.
Image

User avatar
tswsl1989
LHCPortal Guru
Posts: 166
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2009 2:22 pm
Location: Swansea, Wales, UK
Contact:

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by tswsl1989 » Thu Dec 31, 2009 1:04 pm

Following your reasoning:
  1. Proton collides with X-boson, positron, electron
  2. Magnetic hole formed. Presumably by (X-boson+positron)+proton (Proton "can be ruined onto x-boson and positron")
  3. X-boson captured by magnetic hole
  4. Positron annhiliates with an electron
  5. Magnetic hole grows
Problems:
  1. The X-boson both creates and is captured by the magnetic hole. Potential Conservation of Energy violation.
  2. Why do the electrons/positrons bind to the X-boson rather than anhillate?
  3. You still do not give a mechanism for the formation of the magnetic hole
  4. Experimental evidence for X-bosons: Where?
  5. You have now changed your destruction period from a definate 1000 seconds to between that and 1000 days. Why? What is your justification for this?

In short, I find your reasoning to be flawed and your conclusions misleading.

Get back to me when you are willing to present your entire theory on magnetic holes as a factual, scientific document, with full details of your reasoning, mechanisms and justifications, along with full references and any applicable, verifiable experimental evidence. It would probably be useful if you identify all the questions asked of you in this and other forums and address them as part of that paper.

Have a happy new year.

Stephen
Posts: 496
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 11:09 pm

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by Stephen » Thu Dec 31, 2009 1:24 pm

tswsl1989, are you a physicist? If so, then does Ivan's theory is even technically possible or completely illogical?

User avatar
tswsl1989
LHCPortal Guru
Posts: 166
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2009 2:22 pm
Location: Swansea, Wales, UK
Contact:

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by tswsl1989 » Thu Dec 31, 2009 3:32 pm

I'm studying physics at university, so I know a fair bit but I also have an awful lot still to learn. In my opinion, what he is proposing seems wrong, which is why I've asked him the questions I have.

I've read what Ivan's posted, and read the papers that he linked to. I'd be lying if I said I understood everything in those papers though. I'm genuinely interested in what he's posting, but I can't make it sit with everything else I've learnt. It doesn't help that he pulls small bits of information in, while leaving an awful lot of gaps.

From my last post
  1. The X-boson both creates and is captured by the magnetic hole. Potential Conservation of Energy violation.
  2. Why do the electrons/positrons bind to the X-boson rather than anhillate?
  3. You still do not give a mechanism for the formation of the magnetic hole
Unless Ivan can give a verifiable explanation for 1 and 3, then I don't see how what he's proposing is possible.

I intend on taking this up with some of the lectures/postgrads in the department when I get back to university on Monday, to see what their opinion is. I'll let you know what comes of it, or what else I'm able to find out :)

Shadowdraxx
LHCPortal Guru
Posts: 184
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 1:03 am

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by Shadowdraxx » Thu Dec 31, 2009 4:04 pm

No 3 is a question without answer, well anything other than the fact ivan "knows" I've never ever ever seen the mathimatical equations that can even remotely describe this theory so, to me, if feels like this example (read not fact)...


I can say with 100% confidance that a magnetic hole does not exist or wasp, but if i use the same information and pretty pictures i have come to the conclusion that under these conditions a car is produced, which blows up the earth by replicating other matter into cars.

You cannot prove me wrong only show me all experiment data to show my flaws but since i dont have the math answers either I cant prove im right, only i know I am... :P

This is why these discussions go round in loops for ever,

Showing detailed structures of creation and aftermath of new said particle is a working point of theory, and until ANY anti LHC dudes can show this I cant see why anybody should bother.

Im not pro or anti LHC however i am against theories without solid background upon their creation, and im against people spending their time scaring others when they should have used the time to create a paper to PROVE it, then u can discuss and scare ppl if your on the right track its then a real point of concern.

IVAN states himself he has had a year, so go figure what he's been doing, the whole LSAG report only took a year and that had to cover about 8 subjects.

User avatar
MagneticTrap
Posts: 162
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 2:56 pm
Location: Ukraine Crimea Feodosia
Contact:

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by MagneticTrap » Sat Jan 02, 2010 10:46 am

tswsl1989 wrote: Proton collides with X-boson, positron, electron.
No! Collision is a vague term. All protons from one bunch constantly interact with all protons of another bunch by exchange with virtual photons and by some other virtual particles. Most of such collisions are elastic and lead only to change of direction of a particle.

Proton-proton collision, which leads to creation of stable excitation of physical vacuum, can look like this inelastic collision.
Image

Directions of both protons were changed. Moments and kinetic energies of both protons were diminished. Formula of collision can look like one of these formulae:
p + p --> p + p + M;
p + p --> e+ + e+ + M;
p + p --> μ+ + μ+ + M --> …;


Created magnetic hole captures protons; destroy them onto positron and x-boson (or onto μ+ and x-boson, or onto pi+ and x-boson); ejects positron (or μ+, or pi+) and captures x-boson and grow.
Image

JNW
Posts: 42
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 4:48 pm

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by JNW » Sat Jan 02, 2010 5:47 pm

MagneticTrap wrote:
Created magnetic hole captures protons; destroy them onto positron and x-boson (or onto μ+ and x-boson, or onto pi+ and x-boson); ejects positron (or μ+, or pi+) and captures x-boson and grow.
Image
First, treating a proton as an elementary particle is a low energy approximation that can't be used for proton decay. The proton is actually three valence quarks with some virtual gluons and quarks sprinkled about.

Second, the X boson has a charge of 4/3. The charge of your proton decay equation isn't adding up.

Third, the X boson doesn't need a "magnetic hole" to cause proton decay. Two up quarks can merge into a virtual X boson, which can then decay into a positron and an anti down quark.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_boson

The low observed rate of proton decay shows that the mass of the X boson must be around 10^15GeV or higher. Thus, it's nothing to worry about. The same argument can be applied to *any* particle that can mediate proton decay. Virtual particles of that type would cause proton decay, and the observed low rate of proton decay shows that such particles must be extremely massive, far beyond anything the LHC can ever do.

Shadowdraxx
LHCPortal Guru
Posts: 184
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 1:03 am

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by Shadowdraxx » Sat Jan 02, 2010 5:50 pm

just to add some more into the mix have a read of this that Mr Wagner posted recently:

http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0912/0912.5480.pdf

Any input from anyone on the thoughts about this legal take on LHC saftey?

User avatar
MagneticTrap
Posts: 162
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 2:56 pm
Location: Ukraine Crimea Feodosia
Contact:

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by MagneticTrap » Sun Jan 03, 2010 11:18 am

First, treating a proton as an elementary particle is a low energy approximation that can't be used for proton decay. The proton is actually three valence quarks with some virtual gluons and quarks sprinkled about.
Proton as three point-like particles is an approximation, which is tuned to be treated by mathematical apparatus. I can not see it as three particles u, u, d, but I see it as some "stable rotating space-time medium" with three mixed poles u, u, d. And you also had wrote that proton do have not only three particles u, u, d, but also “with some virtual gluons and quarks sprinkled about”.
...proton decay...
1. "Proton decay" can occur only in the exited space-time, i.e. in a space-time with changed geometry, or, which is the same, - in the strong fields.
2. As a result, it can not be thought as if it decays per quarks. Three-polar construction of proton under its decay creates two two-polar constructions: x-boson and positron. The decay process is accompanied by ejection of a couple of gamma-quanta. At this figure we can see a proton as three-polar construction (u,u,d):
Image
After entering into a strong field (or in Kaluza Klein space-time) and after proton decay we can see two two-polar constructions:
positron, having two magnetic poles;
and x-boson, also having two poles: magnetic NS; or electromagnetic N+S-, or N-S+, or N~S~, or mixed electro-magneto-weak. These poles are not already the QCD’s quarks, because x-boson can only live in this unusual geometry.
Image

Second, the X boson has a charge of 4/3. The charge of your proton decay equation isn't adding up.
My x-boson do not consist of two up quarks. It has some properties of X and Y bosons; and it has some properties of “Kaluza-Klein Z’, W’ bosons”.
Third, the X boson doesn't need a "magnetic hole" to cause proton decay. Two up quarks can merge into a virtual X boson, which can then decay into a positron and an anti down quark.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_boson
My x-boson is not a virtual pair of up quarks, but a real two-polar construction, which can exist only in the strong field (only in Kaluza-Klein space-time). In order to make it free, one must spent energy, which is more then binding energy of x-boson in magnetic hole. If such energy (E) is added, then x-boson goes out and decays like this:

x-boson + E --> p + e.

The needed energy E ~ m[sub]pr[/sub]c[sup]2[/sup]/3.
The low observed rate of proton decay shows that the mass of the X boson must be around 10^15GeV or higher.
Proton decay can occur only in already created strong field. The mass of my x-boson is about (2/3) of proton mass. But the minimal possible magnetic hole, which is able to ruin protons, must have about 340 of such x-bosons. That mass corresponds to about 0.34 TeV. Total binding energy of such hole is about 0.17 TeV. In order to create such hole, it is necessary to collide two protons with energy about 0.25 TeV per proton.
Virtual particles of that type would cause proton decay, and the observed low rate of proton decay shows that such particles must be extremely massive, far beyond anything the LHC can ever do.
Observed low rate of proton decay is close to zero because there were no p-p collisions of corresponding energy yet. Wait a little, soon, the process of extremely high rate of proton decay will be switched on and the Solar system will look after as the remnants of SN 1987A.

Image

User avatar
tswsl1989
LHCPortal Guru
Posts: 166
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2009 2:22 pm
Location: Swansea, Wales, UK
Contact:

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by tswsl1989 » Sun Jan 03, 2010 11:30 am

I can not see it as three particles u, u, d, but I see it as some "stable rotating space-time medium"
How unfortunate. Go and read up on current, experimentally particle physics; then come back and explain how your theory fits.

Hwyl.

Post Reply