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

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by Stephen » Sun Jan 03, 2010 1:21 pm

Didn't you admit SN 1987 is not a proof for your theory?

User avatar
Allan
Posts: 109
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 7:10 pm
Location: Denver, Colorado

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by Allan » Sun Jan 03, 2010 8:25 pm

MagneticTrap wrote:
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
I think I figured out Ivan's theory. He doesn't define anything the way anyone else does hence his answers. :ugeek: Now that I figured that out I look at anything he says as crap. :laughing-rolling: Until he falls into line and starts using the same definition, he will not be able to convince me of anything. :mrgreen: Goodbye Ivan :mrgreen:

Allan :occasion-santa:

User avatar
LarryS
Posts: 100
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 3:46 pm
Location: Seymour, CT, USA

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by LarryS » Sun Jan 03, 2010 9:17 pm

TO: Alan and all others following this sieries of posts

FROM: An old retired physicist


Being retired and out of the field for many years, I have learned much from this discussion. Updated my knowledge with new concepts but, even so, I agree with Alan that Ivan's ideas are "crap" and based on a skewed concept of real physics.

With apologies to all for the following personal analogy (but the "fit and image" is too good to pass up), Ivan is what I have called for over 50 years ... "A Human Klein Bottle"; that individual with his foot in his mouth and his head up his ass ....

User avatar
Allan
Posts: 109
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 7:10 pm
Location: Denver, Colorado

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by Allan » Mon Jan 04, 2010 3:40 am

Hi LarryS;

Being a retired systems support analyst with only an amateur's grasp of physics I am very humbled by your agreement with me. I love your analogy of Ivan's "theory". I also agree that using theory without the quotas when talking about Ivan's ranting is actually doing everyone a disservice. :mrgreen:

Allan :wave:

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 » Mon Jan 04, 2010 9:22 am

Well, if my theory is not a theory at all, then place your bets, gentlemen!

What will happen when at LHC they reach the equality pФ / S = mc^2? (p – magnetic moment of x-boson; Ф - magnetic flux through the Compton surface of proton; mc^2 – rest energy of proton.)
1. This will create a microscopic magnetic hole, which will grow and explode the Earth.
2. Nothing will happen.
3. I do not know.

I think, if magnetic moment of x-boson is equal to magnetic moment of proton, then magnetic hole can be created at the p-p collisions with 0.25 TeV per proton. If the moments are different, then there are two possibilities:
1a. Magnetic hole can be created at another energy;
1b. Magnetic hole is impossible.

Do you want to test these conclusions on LHC?

Note: Astronomers do see GRBs, charged jets, pulsars, magnetars, novae and supernovae explosions. All these observable things can be better explained by magnetic holes comparatively to black holes and neutron stars.

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

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by Anitusar » Mon Jan 04, 2010 11:53 am

Ok, my bets are
MagneticTrap wrote:Well, if my theory is not a theory at all, then place your bets, gentlemen!

What will happen when at LHC they reach the equality pФ / S = mc^2? (p – magnetic moment of x-boson; Ф - magnetic flux through the Compton surface of proton; mc^2 – rest energy of proton.)
1. This will create a microscopic magnetic hole, which will grow and explode the Earth.
2. Nothing will happen.
3. I do not know.
2. Nothing will happen. Because there is no x-boson as you define it. Plus your ideas are not a theory.
MagneticTrap wrote: I think, if magnetic moment of x-boson is equal to magnetic moment of proton, then magnetic hole can be created at the p-p collisions with 0.25 TeV per proton. If the moments are different, then there are two possibilities:
1a. Magnetic hole can be created at another energy;
1b. Magnetic hole is impossible.
1b. Magnetic hole is impossible.
MagneticTrap wrote: Do you want to test these conclusions on LHC?
Well, not yours but others
MagneticTrap wrote: Note: Astronomers do see GRBs, charged jets, pulsars, magnetars, novae and supernovae explosions. All these observable things can be better explained by magnetic holes comparatively to black holes and neutron stars.
No they are not better explained by your ideas. You make so many assumptions and yet not deliver a single experimental evidence, that i would be really surprised if your ideas are even self consistent.

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 » Mon Jan 04, 2010 1:35 pm

You make so many assumptions and yet not deliver a single experimental evidence, that i would be really surprised if your ideas are even self consistent.
My main theory “Ever Young Universe” has much less assumption as Big Bang Dogma with all its unproved fantasies and especially invented essences, such as dark energy, dark matter, inflation, time centrism, bh evaporation, neutrino oscillations and so on. My last small theory “Magnetic Holes” has math proves and many experimental evidences such as GRBs, charged jets, pulsars, magnetars, novae and supernovae explosions and so on.
Magnetic hole is impossible.
Do you see the difference between my cautious assertion “Magnetic hole is impossible, if…”, and your brave assertion “Magnetic hole is impossible” without any “if”. That led me to the conclusion that you are a person, unable to reasonable scientific discussion.

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

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by Stephen » Mon Jan 04, 2010 2:23 pm

You are the one making bold statements, Ivan.

"CERN scientists are criminals" - without a proof.
"Big Bang theorists are wrong" - where in reality, this theory has more basis than yours.
"There is a 50% chance that a magnetic collapse will occur at 3.5 TeV" - without a calculation to show how you calculated this probability.

:confusion-questionmarks:

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

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by Anitusar » Mon Jan 04, 2010 3:23 pm

MagneticTrap wrote:
You make so many assumptions and yet not deliver a single experimental evidence, that i would be really surprised if your ideas are even self consistent.
My main theory “Ever Young Universe” has much less assumption as Big Bang Dogma with all its unproved fantasies and especially invented essences, such as dark energy, dark matter, inflation, time centrism, bh evaporation, neutrino oscillations and so on. My last small theory “Magnetic Holes” has math proves and many experimental evidences such as GRBs, charged jets, pulsars, magnetars, novae and supernovae explosions and so on.
You know that the big bang theory was not favoured and only won out, because it explained a lot more observations, such as Galaxy flying away from us and so on. It also predicted the cosmic microwave background, which was found later.

You know that neutrino oscillation has been measured with quite a great precision.

There is a lot of evidence for dark matter such as the motion of our galaxy and the cluster ZwCl0024+1652 (e.g. http://www.spacetelescope.org/news/html/heic0709.html) and again the wmap data. All these theories have been looked at by many scientists and have been checked against experimental data from a lot of independent measurements!
MagneticTrap wrote:
Magnetic hole is impossible.
Do you see the difference between my cautious assertion “Magnetic hole is impossible, if…”, and your brave assertion “Magnetic hole is impossible” without any “if”. That led me to the conclusion that you are a person, unable to reasonable scientific discussion.
No, its not me that is not joining a discussion. Present your ideas at a conference. In Germany, there is for example the DPG conferences, where some sessions are always dedicated to people with theories, which are not (at all) accepted by the main stream. And people are listening to such ideas, because it might provide a new view on the world.

I am not saying that the current theories are the answer to everything, but they are our current knowledge accepted by a lot of people. They provided also predictions, which turned out to be correct.

But your wording is not very scientific, for example:
Some theorists suggest that the Higgs bosons will be registered at the LHC. And, if these particles will not been found, the theorists would be very surprised; - this would prove that the Standard Model is wrong. Higgs boson had received a new name, "the God particle". We know that the most of particles have their corresponding antiparticles. So, if there is a particle of God, then there is a particle of Devil.


And i should take you serious ??

By the way: There are lot of scientist, which believe that the Higgs will not be found. LHC was build to decide this question. If the LHC experiments do not find this particle, this theory is dead.

Edit: It would also not prove, that the Standard Model is wrong. The Higgs mechanism would be wrong, but the Standard model consists of QED and QCD, which predictions were measured with very, very high accuracy. Scientists have conducted countless experiments to find deviations from the SM predictions for 30 years now and failed to do so. Only recently some hints were found. And you also may notice the wording: Standard model, not theory. Because people know, that there has to be a deeper theory behind this.

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

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by JNW » Mon Jan 04, 2010 4:59 pm

MagneticTrap wrote:... magnetic hole can be created at the p-p collisions with 0.25 TeV per proton. ...

Do you want to test these conclusions on LHC?
Relax, the LHC will never reach 0.25 TeV per proton.

It can only do from 0.45 TeV to 7.0 TeV per proton. 0.25 TeV is well outside that range.

So we are safe!

:happy-jumpyellow:

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

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by Stephen » Mon Jan 04, 2010 5:46 pm

ORION111 wrote:I have read your despicable comments on scientific videos on YouTube.
Not to mention his fear mongering on CNN articles.

User avatar
Allan
Posts: 109
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 7:10 pm
Location: Denver, Colorado

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by Allan » Mon Jan 04, 2010 5:49 pm

Hi Ivan;

I do hope you read the two articles referenced by Orion earlier. I think you then will be able to see a couple of truly well written papers. They have no name calling nor do they jump are around without logic as your ramblings do.

They simply quote data from experiments and then once all the facts have been laid out reach conclusions. Granted their conclusion are totally at odds with yours but after attempting to read your totally nonsensical ramblings that doesn't surprise me.

Allan

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 » Tue Jan 05, 2010 8:44 am

ORION111 wrote:
Stephen wrote:(1)Not to mention his fear mongering on CNN articles.
(2)Well, he inherently hates science. (3)And is of-course paranoid by his own highly-deluded and mangled views of physics.

1. I want to live and want you also live. That is why I wrote everywhere I can.
2. I hate physicists who undergo our lives to death risk.
3. If you can not imagine non-Euclidean space, pseudo-Euclidean space, 4d rotation, that is your problems.
Allan wrote:I do hope you read the two articles referenced by Orion earlier. I think you then will be able to see a couple of truly well written papers. They have no name calling nor do they jump are around without logic as your ramblings do.

They simply quote data from experiments and then once all the facts have been laid out reach conclusions. Granted their conclusion are totally at odds with yours but after attempting to read your totally nonsensical ramblings that doesn't surprise me.
I’ll read the articles. And you, please, read the article “History of the 2.7 K temperature prior to Penzias and Wilson”
http://www.ifi.unicamp.br/~assis/Apeiro ... (1995).pdf

You will find there, who had predicted and registered the cosmic microwave background: bigbangers or adherents of eternal universe.
ORION111 wrote:1. The terms
Again. The word "theory" in science means different than the one used in common language. In science, "theory" means the overarching logic [overarching fact] of evidence, observations, and the scientific laws.
What is Big Bang: fact, theory, hypothesis, lie, religious dogma? I think it is the last. Big Bang is a Religious Dogma, built on theft, deception, lies, crime.

ORION111 wrote:The "Big Bang" is a yet unknown event that occurred 13.72 ± 0.12 billion years ago.
That is not the age of Universe. 365 days is not the age of Earth. The Earth needs 365 days in order to make one full revolution around the Sun in 3d space. The Universe needs 13.34 billions years t make one full 4d rotation. The value 73.29 km/s/Mpc is not the parameter of Universe expansion, but the angular frequency of Universal 4d rotation. (If we reduce km and Mpc to meters, we will have the Hubble constant, written in SI units: H=2.375*10^-18 1/s.)

Let’s look at three scales: micro, macro, Mega. We are macro objects.
If we look inward, into micro world, we’ll see the microscopic rotation (spin, magnetic moments) described by Planck constant, h or hbar. If we look outward, into Mega world, we’ll see the Universal 4d rotation, described by Hubble constant, H or Hbar. Hubble constant is the same physical constant as c, h, e, G and so on. At the end of 20-th century religious BB dogmatic physicists did see at last that H does not change with the time, but they did not drop out their dogma and invented then the “dark energy”, an essence, which accelerates expansion, which do not let the Hubble constant to become smaller. They are idiots! The Universe does not undergo the gravity collapse because there is a microwave background radiation (CBR) in the closed Universe. The curvature of Universe and its total mass gives us the possibility to compute the temperature of CBR, T = 2.728 K, which excellently coincides with observational value. This value is also the same physical constant as c, h, e, G and so on. CBR in Ever Young Universe plays the similar role as “dark energy” plays in the BB model. But CBR is observable and natural, but the dark energy is invisible and totally unscientific. Ha-ha-ha. Contemporary science sees only 4% of Universal matter, - barionic matter. The rest is ghost invisible matter. Ha-ha-ha. Contemporary scientists are thieves, witches, bandits and potential killers.
ORION111 wrote:…leave the Steady State hypothesis alone, which has been disproved of long ago in the last century…
There are dozens of Steady State models of Universe. They were and are developed by real scientists. There are thousands of real scientists all over the world. But most of them are dispersed now, because the official science is a gang of criminals now. http://www.cosmologystatement.org/
Anitusar wrote: You know that the big bang theory was not favoured and only won out, because it explained a lot more observations, such as Galaxy flying away from us and so on.(1) It also predicted the cosmic microwave background, which was found later.(2)

You know that neutrino oscillation has been measured with quite a great precision.(3)


No, its not me that is not joining a discussion. Present your ideas at a conference. In Germany, there is for example the DPG conferences, where some sessions are always dedicated to people with theories, which are not (at all) accepted by the main stream. And people are listening to such ideas, because it might provide a new view on the world.(4)..
1. “Galaxy flying away”, or to be more precise “the red shift of galaxies light”, can be explained by many of others more scientific causes.
2. CBR was predicted and measured more precisely dozens of years earlier without any BB hypothesis. http://www.ifi.unicamp.br/~assis/Apeiro ... (1995).pdf
3. The falsifications about the neutrino oscillations hide the real sources of stellar energy sources.
4. Conference? I would do it with pleasure. But bigbangers will non listen me. They would explode the Earth better. Religion and science are incompatible.
Stephen wrote:You are the one making bold statements, Ivan.

"CERN scientists are criminals" - without a proof.
"Big Bang theorists are wrong" - where in reality, this theory has more basis than yours.
"There is a 50% chance that a magnetic collapse will occur at 3.5 TeV" - without a calculation to show how you calculated this probability.
1. If we will not stop LHC, the ceiling of your room will smash you into a thin film some day this year with probability about 50%. That will be the proof of my assertion that "CERN scientists are criminals".
2. Big Bang theorists are thieves, witches, bandits, potential killers. I and others are trying to build the real cosmology and to stop BB crimes.
3. I said about my personal power of trust to results, following from two independent mathematical proves, and to dozens of additional proving arguments.

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 » Tue Jan 05, 2010 9:45 am

3. I said about my personal power of trust to results, following from two independent mathematical proves, and to dozens of additional proving arguments.
Which are absolutely worthless until published and verified, and I strongly suspect would be found to have no basis in scientific fact whatsoever.

tswsl1989 exits the thread

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

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by Stephen » Tue Jan 05, 2010 11:52 am

MagneticTrap wrote: 1. If we will not stop LHC, the ceiling of your room will smash you into a thin film some day this year with probability about 50%. That will be the proof of my assertion that "CERN scientists are criminals".
2. Big Bang theorists are thieves, witches, bandits, potential killers. I and others are trying to build the real cosmology and to stop BB crimes.
3. I said about my personal power of trust to results, following from two independent mathematical proves, and to dozens of additional proving arguments.
1. Show the calculation you used to reach the result of 50%.
2. Please contact the scientists you mentioned. How many of them think the LHC is dangerous? How many of them believe your theory of magnetic holes?
3. You invented both of these approaches.

Post Reply