It started out with a simple theory on the speed of light, and I stumbled upon a theory on how a Star dies and creates "black holes".

 

I don't know if I should share though.

 

Also, if i do share it, i'm going to my Science 20 teacher before hand to see if this is feasible.

It started out with a simple theory on the speed of light, and I stumbled upon a theory on how a Star dies and creates "black holes".

 

Does it involve gravity and neutron degeneracy pressure?

 

If so, someone has already beaten you to it. Sorry!

Does it involve gravity and neutron degeneracy pressure?

 

If so, someone has already beaten you to it. Sorry!

 

 

Nope, it involves a particle faster than the speed of light, a particle that is infinitely times faster than light

That's all i'm gonna say, for now.

Oh, and light doesn't exist. There's a mind boggling theory

 

Just a theory disproving everything science has taught me thus far.

Edited October 25, 201114 yr by SaigoNoAkuma

Nope, it involves a particle faster than the speed of light, a particle that is infinitely times faster than light

That's all i'm gonna say, for now.

Oh, and light doesn't exist. There's a mind boggling theory

 

Just a theory disproving everything science has taught me thus far.

 

Have you considered the possibility that you might be wrong?

Have you considered the possibility that you might be wrong?

 

Scientific discoveries are all produced by people who were shunned apon because they were wrong. So, anything is possible.

Every heard about a Darkon? /troll face/

Just a theory disproving everything science has taught me thus far.

Irony. I get it.

Have you considered the possibility that you might be wrong?

 

 

 

 

Light does not exist, apart from darkness; light is merely the absence of darkness. For example, the sun does not produce light, but, rather, has an attractional force that draws in particles of darkness, called "darkons''. When the earth turns toward the sun, the darkons are drawn away, leaving behind light, except in areas where the darkon field is obstructed by trees, buildings, or the like. The areas in which the darkon field is obstructed are known as "shadows''

 

 

Scientific discoveries are all produced by people who were shunned apon because they were wrong. So, anything is possible.

Every heard about a Darkon? /troll face/

 

What is your background in physics?

 

This is important because remember that all existing scientific theories regarding light have accumulated decades of experimental confirmation.

 

Any theory that you claim to upend established scientific theories will need to explain the results of those experiments. As a result, it's a good idea to have an idea of these mountains of evidence you are attempting to overturn.

 

Light does not exist, apart from darkness; light is merely the absence of darkness. For example, the sun does not produce light, but, rather, has an attractional force that draws in particles of darkness, called "darkons''. When the earth turns toward the sun, the darkons are drawn away, leaving behind light, except in areas where the darkon field is obstructed by trees, buildings, or the like. The areas in which the darkon field is obstructed are known as "shadows''

 

 

 

 

So does my pocket flashlight have the same attractional force for darkon particles as the sun?

 

When I shine my flashlight and then place a mirror in front of it to reflect light behind the flashlight, how do the darkons directly in front know to stop being attracted to the flashlight, and how do the darkons behind the light know to suddenly START being attacted to it?

 

These are a couple of simple thought experiments that you need to think through very clearly before presenting your theory. These are all currently explained quite easily with existing theories of light.

Just a thought about the thread title.

No, it's not urgent.

We have about 5 billion years before it's of any practical importance to us.

 

(of course, that presupposes that your idea is helpful anyway.)

It's trivially easy to prove that light exists, as the energy transfer can be easily measured using any number of detectors including bolometers, photodiodes, photomultiplier tubes and many many more.

 

Failing that effects such as plasmonics, etc... are all direct measurable proof that light exists...

 

Darkons just won't work. Sorry.

How does one explain the photoelectric effect via darkons?

 

Or Compton scattering?

 

Or X-ray imagery?

 

Or radio?

Even the Fresnel equations would fail. Maxwell's equations would have no explanation.

 

There are many many many many problems here.

It is possible to make Darkons work. We just need to patch the theory to fit experimental data.

 

What you would need to match observation is some sort of particle that transmits the attractive force to darkons from darkon attractors. Knowing past experiments, this particle would need to travel at c. And at c, it would need to be massless and measurable in quantum packets.

 

All we need now is a name for this hypothetical massless particle that travels at c from darkon attractors.

 

Any suggestions? I was thinking "anti-darkons"

This is quite funny.

If UV radiation causes cancer, than Dakrons must cure it.

Edited October 25, 201114 yr by euouae

If UV radiation causes cancer, than Dakrons must cure it.

Only if they are of the correct frequency.

if sunlight can turn grapes into raisins darkons must be able to turn raisins into grapes

if sunlight can turn grapes into raisins darkons must be able to turn raisins into grapes

 

some processes are one way, but barring that, if darkons are true then it is actually the lack of darkons that turn grapes into raisins and photons don't exist.

 

its all baloney anyway.if it was darkons then all sorts of interesting things should be happening. IIRC this was used by our physics teacher in high school to show that there can be multiple plausible sounding theories and to determine a way to test each. as expected photons worked out. primarily because of the photoelectric effect.

How does one explain the photoelectric effect via darkons?

 

Or Compton scattering?

 

Or X-ray imagery?

 

Or radio?

 

Or single molecule fluorescence. One measured photon in, one measured photon out.

 

The existence of darkons would make all spectroscopy fail miserably.

The existence of darkons would make all spectroscopy fail miserably.

 

Don't tell that to the creationists!

Wow, really?

http://www.rogermwilcox.com/darksuck.txt

https://www.msu.edu/user/dynicrai/physics/dark.htm