zidzad1 Posted March 9, 2014 Author Share Posted March 9, 2014 If i was a troll why would I promote this theory so much, I found this theory and I realized it had potential because it answers all the questions in physics. Thank you for being ignorant mainstream media worshippers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pwagen Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/10298-so-youve-got-a-new-theory/ -1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lightmeow Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 (edited) Edited March 9, 2014 by Lightmeow 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Cuthber Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 Tell me one aspect that is wrong this theory is amazing and just because it contradicts what you've been told you're whole life dosent mean its wrong OK. Here's one aspect that's wrong. " when any charged particle starts accelerating it's apparent charge becomes less as it approaches the speed of light that's why the quarks charge is higher the mass is less (1/3 and 2/3) you can check." Now, when it comes to science, I don't really care what people have told me. I care about the evidence. And the evidence ( from things like synchrotron radiation)shows that the paper is wrong. that's it. the idea is dead. Let it rest in peace. You have already lost the argument. The only question still open is how long it will take you to realise this. -1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 I think perhaps you need to respect all theories rather than disregarding them just because they are different. First of all, this isn't a theory. You don't get to be a theory without a mathematical model, and this paper is light on the math — what's in there are snippets of freshman physics and not much beyond that. You also need lots of experimental support to advance something to the level of theory. Second of all, respect is earned. New ideas go through a trial by fire and are not accepted unless they can withstand scrutiny and testing, which this fails to do. people are dismissive of this proposal because it's trivially wrong. Tell me one aspect that is wrong this theory is amazing and just because it contradicts what you've been told you're whole life dosent mean its wrong One in addition to the list of objections that have already been mentioned? How many things have to be shown to be wrong before you'll accept that it's wrong? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lightmeow Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 (edited) First of all, this isn't a theory. You don't get to be a theory without a mathematical model, and this paper is light on the math — what's in there are snippets of freshman physics and not much beyond that. You also need lots of experimental support to advance something to the level of theory. I hope you mean freshman college physics, or my school must really suck. Edited March 10, 2014 by Lightmeow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 I hope you mean freshman college physics, or my school must really suck. Yes. Perhaps I should have said first-year/introductory physics. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 He says the UDP is the building block He just asserts this. He has no evidence for the existence of this UDP and no theoretical justification. He made it up. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg H. Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 (edited) Tell me one aspect that is wrong this theory is amazing and just because it contradicts what you've been told you're whole life dosent mean its wrong The fact that every scrap of experimental evidence we have on the matter contradicts this theory tells us it's wrong. My signature applies here. "Remember - if the predictions of your theory disagree with reality, it is not reality that is wrong." Edited March 10, 2014 by Greg H. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phi for All Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 If i was a troll why would I promote this theory so much, I found this theory and I realized it had potential because it answers all the questions in physics. Thank you for being ignorant mainstream media worshippers. Thank you for being so honest about "finding" this paper. It's rare that someone who isn't the author would care so much. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zidzad1 Posted March 10, 2014 Author Share Posted March 10, 2014 Ignorant. just because you do not understand physics and don't know the truth. -7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 Ignorant. just because you do not understand physics and don't know the truth. Again, what is your basis for such an assessment? You are not a physicist and are in secondary school. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Cuthber Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 Ignorant. just because you do not understand physics and don't know the truth. Read this, then work out how come you think you have all the answers, even though you are a schoolkid while the actual physicists and scientists spot glaring holes in that paper. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lightmeow Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 Ignorant. just because you do not understand physics and don't know the truth. Who are you to say this!!! You are only a high schooler!!! -1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sensei Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 Tell me one aspect that is wrong this theory is amazing and just because it contradicts what you've been told you're whole life dosent mean its wrong Did not I mentioned different total energy equation already.. ? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg H. Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 This topic is rapidly degenerating into "No You!" being tossed back and forth. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zidzad1 Posted March 10, 2014 Author Share Posted March 10, 2014 You have no evidence against it and the mainstream scientific models are fake and have no evidence give me 1 piece of evidence for spacetime. -2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lightmeow Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 You have no evidence against it and the mainstream scientific models are fake and have no evidence give me 1 piece of evidence for spacetime. Hey dum-dum, I gave you some a while ago: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tests_of_general_relativity -1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 You have no evidence against it and the mainstream scientific models are fake and have no evidence give me 1 piece of evidence for spacetime. http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html When you can demonstrate that every single one of those is wrong, then we can talk. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lightmeow Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 Peoples, we know hes trolling now. That last comment, oh, the insanity!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 You have no evidence against it and the mainstream scientific models are fake and have no evidence give me 1 piece of evidence for spacetime. O M G The irony of communicating "the mainstream scientific models are fake" on a frikkin' computer (based on quantum mechanics) which was transmitted using technology based on QM, E&M, and relativity is staggering. All of modern technology is based on these mainstream scientific models, and the technology works. The proof of the pudding and all that. On the other hand, NONE of modern technology is based on this paper that you put so much stock in. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phi for All Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 You have no evidence against it and the mainstream scientific models are fake and have no evidence give me 1 piece of evidence for spacetime. ! Moderator Note You have now taken on a seemingly impossible task, that of disproving all mainstream scientific models. To date, your arguments have fallen short of the minimum rigor we expect in the Speculations section. Hand-waving and denial aren't working. Please go back through the thread and try to address some of the questions being asked of you, and review the evidence presented by others. That one paper proves a world-wide conspiracy is an extraordinary claim, so you must provide an extraordinary explanation. Report or discuss this modnote elsewhere, please. Hey dum-dum, I gave you some a while ago: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tests_of_general_relativity ! Moderator Note Attack ideas, not people, please. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Cuthber Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 You have no evidence against it and the mainstream scientific models are fake and have no evidence give me 1 piece of evidence for spacetime. Does your gps work? If it does, that's your evidence- seen with your own eyes. Are you still going to argue against what you can see for yourself? If so, there's no point asking us for evidence because you are ignoring the evidence that you already have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg H. Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 (edited) You have no evidence against it and the mainstream scientific models are fake and have no evidence give me 1 piece of evidence for spacetime. Unfortauntely, we do not really have the time to throughly review the entire history of physics with you - if you're really curious, there are plenty of resources available to you that will explain modern scientific models, and the evidence that supports them. Unfortunately, I really don't think you have any inclination to learn anything at all; your mind is already made up, and you are interested neither in receiving knowledge nor in providing it. I'd like to move that the thread be closed by the mods. Edited March 11, 2014 by Greg H. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imatfaal Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 I'd like to move that the thread be closed by the mods.This is not a democracy - on a good day we might approximate a benign dictatorship. In this case if the OP doesn't read, digest, and fulfill Phi's sage advice I think you will get your wish. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts