Jump to content

Science took a wrong turn.


Amateur -1
 Share

Recommended Posts

Science took a wrong turn.

 

It all took a wrong turn with the missed understanding of the double slit experiment in the 20's.

 

And along with the discovery of the universe is expanding that took everyone away for Einstein's work that was right ON , but no one would pay attention to him any longer.

 

Well with the new MIT very high speed camera I know that the 1920's experiment can be turned around and be totally understood and fully predictable.

 

And GR and QM can be expressed in a consistent language.

 

 

Part #2

And yes Einstein’s Cosmological Constant can explain a static;

 

1. The planet moon systems.

 

2. The solar systems.

 

3. The galactic systems.

 

4. Along with why the galaxies are accelerating away from each other.

 

It is all in understanding the making of High-Density Mass and the expelling of true gravitational fields.

 

one & two slets.bmp

pin hole camera.bmp

Edited by Amateur -1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Amateur-1

 

Here is a thought for your consideration. When a poster opens a thread with a phrase such as "science took a wrong turn", the mjaority of readers think "Oh, no, not again. Another ill informed crank, who thinks they have the answers, who will pepper his thread with misinterpretations, misunderstandings, blatant stupidity and a commitment to wrongness that would have embarassed Lysenko." I doubt that is the reaction you were aiming for.

 

You could transform that reaction by opening with a slight modification. "Is it possible science took a wrong turn? I'd like to offer some evidence and some speculative reasoning that suggests this may be the case."

 

Te medium is the message.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any independent test of the conjecture that the field of the atoms at the edge of the slits is what causes the deflection? Doesn't this imply that the material matters, rather than (or in addition to) the geometry?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Amateur-1

 

Here is a thought for your consideration. When a poster opens a thread with a phrase such as "science took a wrong turn", the mjaority of readers think "Oh, no, not again. Another ill informed crank, who thinks they have the answers, who will pepper his thread with misinterpretations, misunderstandings, blatant stupidity and a commitment to wrongness that would have embarassed Lysenko." I doubt that is the reaction you were aiming for.

 

You could transform that reaction by opening with a slight modification. "Is it possible science took a wrong turn? I'd like to offer some evidence and some speculative reasoning that suggests this may be the case."

 

Te medium is the message.

 

 

Hello Ophiolite;

 

It has been about eight years last that we talked.

 

Your thoughts are fine and as always you still try to help new comers,

 

but as you my come to see that I am no new comer. And you can see nothing

 

has changed.

 

My dyslexic way seeing and thinking along with wording things is keeping me

 

From communicating to people.

 

Back in the early 90's I stopped talking on the forums, when as now you my

 

Remember that I tried to worn the officials in Turkey two days in advance of an Earthquke and

 

Tens of thousands of people died.

 

Amateur -1, aka

 

alpha-137,

 

G-1

 

 

PS; I stell have you picture;

picture removed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

!

Moderator Note



Amateur-1

Posting pictures of other members is absolutely not appropriate behavior. Do not do it again.

Secondly, you will notice that you have been asked questions related to your hypothesis. The rules of the Speculations forum require that you answer them. Please do so that we can elicit some kind of discussion out of this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

!

Moderator Note

 

 

Amateur-1

 

Posting pictures of other members is absolutely not appropriate behavior. Do not do it again.

 

Secondly, you will notice that you have been asked questions related to your theory. The rules of the Speculations forum require that you answer them. Please do so that we can elicit some kind of discussion out of this.

 

 

 

I am Sorry about the picture!Hi Ophiolite;

 

If you remember that I was downloading a daily NOAA and SUGS maps and was

 

tracking what I conceived as gravitational waves. And when a weaker G-wave that

 

Would cause a area lower temp in an area of warmer area;

 

[ Due to lower G-force making the water sobering less heat.]

 

crossed a fault -line it would it would lesion the gravity locking stress on the fault

 

and cause an Earthquake.

 

An example ;

 

post-66453-0-84537000-1335883602_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any independent test of the conjecture that the field of the atoms at the edge of the slits is what causes the deflection? Doesn't this imply that the material matters, rather than (or in addition to) the geometry?

 

 

Sir;

 

I have grate respect for anyone that has polished the nose of my Hero before doing a

 

physics test, I have not, But I was very lucky to meat him in person one time.

 

It is not just my concept of the edge's of the slits here,

 

What I was trying to suggest is that some times we need to use the newer technology

 

to recheck some of the older experiments.

 

You are most likely setting at your desk and in your desk you most likely have a

 

laser-pointer. I ask what is your concept of why if you aimed that laser-pointer at a

 

rod that is the very same as the with of the beam and see that the beam will be bent

 

around the rod and come to a focus-point a short dissident behind the rod.

 

All that I will say is that Einstein says that gravity will bend light. Also These little

 

fields are what causes accretion [gravity] a very short distant in space, [Away from gravity.] they can pull salt &

 

sugar together, also keep in mind a water drop at the edge of pitcher until it accretion adds

 

to it more water and gravity pulls the drop off the edge.

 

Please Sir you conception or what you call "

 

Speculations."

 

on this.

 

Edited by Amateur -1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...?

 

 

Sir;

 

These are very old experiments.

 

And What I was trying to suggest is that some times we need to use the newer technology to recheck some of the older experiments.

 

Please Sir all Im asking is for your or anyone else’s conception or what you call “

 

Speculations.”

 

on this.

 

Please read my post at

 

Today, 10:06 AM

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sir;

 

I have grate respect for anyone that has polished the nose of my Hero before doing a

 

physics test, I have not, But I was very lucky to meat him in person one time.

 

It is not just my concept of the edge's of the slits here,

 

What I was trying to suggest is that some times we need to use the newer technology

 

to recheck some of the older experiments.

 

You are most likely setting at your desk and in your desk you most likely have a

 

laser-pointer. I ask what is your concept of why if you aimed that laser-pointer at a

 

rod that is the very same as the with of the beam and see that the beam will be bent

 

around the rod and come to a focus-point a short dissident behind the rod.

 

All that I will say is that Einstein says that gravity will bend light. Also These little

 

fields are what causes accretion [gravity] a very short distant in space, [Away from gravity.] they can pull salt &

 

sugar together, also keep in mind a water drop at the edge of pitcher until it accretion adds

 

to it more water and gravity pulls the drop off the edge.

 

Please Sir you conception or what you call "

 

Speculations."

 

on this.

 

 

Unable to answer my question, or unwilling?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sir;

 

I have grate respect for anyone that has polished the nose of my Hero before doing a

 

physics test, I have not, But I was very lucky to meat him in person one time.

 

It is not just my concept of the edge's of the slits here,

 

What I was trying to suggest is that some times we need to use the newer technology

 

to recheck some of the older experiments.

 

You are most likely setting at your desk and in your desk you most likely have a

 

laser-pointer. I ask what is your concept of why if you aimed that laser-pointer at a

 

rod that is the very same as the with of the beam and see that the beam will be bent

 

around the rod and come to a focus-point a short dissident behind the rod.

 

All that I will say is that Einstein says that gravity will bend light. Also These little

 

fields are what causes accretion [gravity] a very short distant in space, [Away from gravity.] they can pull salt &

 

sugar together, also keep in mind a water drop at the edge of pitcher until it accretion adds

 

to it more water and gravity pulls the drop off the edge.

 

Please Sir you conception or what you call "

 

Speculations."

 

on this.

 

 

 

 

 

swansont, on 1 May 2012 - 03:48 AM, said:

 

"Any independent test of the conjecture that the field of the atoms at the edge of the slits is what causes the deflection? Doesn't this imply that the material matters, rather than (or in addition to) the geometry?"

 

 

Sir;

 

What I am Saying & Einstein said that ALL MASS has Gravity extending from it's, now days most scientist call it at very short range " ACCRENTION "

 

Sir did you even read my answer to your question??????

OK; I now understand now; Back in the 70’s I paid over $4,000 to take a class of a Nobel Prize winner, and the end when I turned my paper, [back then we did not have spell-checkers.] and on the front cover I missed spelled a word and before he set it on his deck he put a C on it.

 

 

 

Edited by Amateur -1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sir;

 

These are very old experiments.

 

And What I was trying to suggest is that some times we need to use the newer technology to recheck some of the older experiments.

 

Please Sir all Im asking is for your or anyone else’s conception or what you call “

 

Speculations.”

 

on this.

 

Please read my post at

 

Today, 10:06 AM

 

The experiments are re-examined, repeated and extended. Double slit experiments have been conducted with near macroscopic objects such as bucky balls. Also, no matter how old the experiment you need to be able to mathematically show the results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is an etiquette to modern science.Nowadays you can`t just jump out of the bath and run up the road shouting 'Eureka' in a loud voice.If you`re going to give your topic such a title then it deserves all the scorn and derision it gets - Whatever the content.

Link to comment
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.