Jump to content

RayDog

Full Members
  • Posts

    1386
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by RayDog

  1. I am not worried that my work won't pass peer review as it is based on standard model quantum field theory, sound logic and well-known physics relationships. I consider physics to be the single greatest puzzle to solve of all the puzzles faced by humanity. I am rather happy to not be taken very seriously at this point because it allows me to continue to extend my knowledge and understanding, adding new and more scientific solutions to parts of the puzzle, while other physicists are mostly going in wrong directions. I am enjoying my 20 year head start on most of the physics community. Once my work gets discovered by the mainstream, I will lose my advantage. I hope to complete my research and related book on particle theory as well as a paper on gravitation before focusing on promoting my work more seriously. A couple things about publication. Most physics papers are never published in peer reviewed journals, so I am not in an unusual position. Of those papers that do get published in most journals (not Nature or Science) the typical number of reads is 4 or 5, the editor, 2 peer reviewers and 1 or 2 journal readers. My papers get hundreds of reads, so I am actually getting more exposure using the venues I am using than I might with a closed peer reviewed journal.
  2. I found that Coulomb's constant was mistyped in my spreadsheet, so thanks for finding the error. That means that the Casimir effect is about 10% stronger based on this Casimir force approximation than I included in the paper. This will give me a good reason to update the paper. As I said before, the minus sign in the front of the equation indicates that the force is attractive. The minus sign was not due to the integration, but was added after the fact. The Casimir force between two spheres is attractive not repulsive, so that is not an error. In the update I will probably delete the force equation since you are not the only person confused by it.
  3. Kiev was the original capital of the Kingdom if Rus, so perhaps Putin should cede control of Russia to Ukraine.
  4. Axiom only pointed out flaws in his own understanding and reading comprehension, not flaws in the paper.
  5. Your insistence that I compute all cases is a strawman argument that amounts to a denial of the existence of the Casimir effect. Perhaps it would be helpful if you consider that much of the force pushing protons together comes from the van der Waals forces inside the protons and neutrons. That is what happens when you consider the standard Casmir force between two spheres. Packing protons and neutrons together does not diminish the force between them since it arises from inside them. The integration in the paper is only valid for the case where the distance L is equal to the radius a, as the equation is difficult to integrate more generally. So you must combine the two terms, integrate, and then separate them. I did this just to illustrate what the energy equation looks like in an ideal case even though it is only valid at one point. It does not effect the results in any respects since that equation was not used in the calculations. I calculated the energy for each distance and then converted it to force point-by-point when calculating the Casimir effect results used in the table. Note that the minus sign indicates that the force is attractive. It has nothing to do with the integration. We seem to be on the same page finally on how the Coulomb force is calculated. I did the calculations in Excel, so feel confident in them. I also had them verified by someone I trust a lot more than you. Perhaps there are rounding errors, but even so calling out rounding errors is another strawman. Pointing to my other work on mechanical forces is yet another strawman argument with regard to this paper. I will say however that where there is a force there is an acceleration (F=ma), which is true for any force. Logically if a force exists there must be a physical cause responsible for the acceleration. Any theory that fails to provide a physical cause for acceleration is at best incomplete and at worse invalid. Do you follow that? If not, just stop here until you figure it out. General Relativity (GR) theory, for example, does not include a physical cause of acceleration. If we take the two body case and place two bodies in space at some distance apart and have them stationary to begin with, GR theory does not explain how they accelerate, even less provide a physical explanation for the acceleration. Newtonian gravitational theory does not include an explanation for acceleration either. Either theory is incomplete or possibly completely wrong due to this deficiency. In the best case scenario the underlying physical cause of acceleration must be known before proceeding with developing the remainder of the theory. If we look at standard electromagnetic (EM) theory. If you take two magnets and orient them such that they push apart and use one to push the other, the theory does not explain the cause of acceleration of the second magnet. It does not explain the physical cause of acceleration either when two magnets are attracted and come together, yet they certainly do come together. Electrostatic theory also does not explain the physical cause of acceleration when two charges are attracted or repelled. Thus electromagnetic theory is incomplete. If we consider the standard model strong force, there is no physical explanation for the acceleration between nucleons. As with the prior two examples being able to compute the acceleration is not the same thing as understanding the underlying physical mechanism responsible for the acceleration. If we consider mechanical forces when there is no physical contact (no electron degeneracy pressure), there is no physical explanation for acceleration. This is mostly evident with rotating objects like gyroscopes that can be accelerated without there being physical contact with another object in a way that would cause acceleration in the direction we observe. As above, mechanical force theory is incomplete and missing the most important part. Being able to compute a result is not the same thing as explaining what is physically happening. There is only one accepted theory in standard model physics that does incorporate a physical explanation for acceleration when two objects are not in contact. That theory is the Casimir effect. It turns out that we do not need a second theory, as the van der Waals forces that underly the Casimir effect underly all of standard model quantum field theory. Here is a paper I wrote about that where I develop a general Casimir theory with respect to EM forces. http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research Papers-Mechanics / Electrodynamics/Download/7129
  6. The Texas Tribune article says that Cruz raised $4 million over the same period and has $10 million on hand to Beto's $14 million.
  7. Feel free to point out flaws in my papers rather than make broad baseless accusations.
  8. With the next supreme court they will.
  9. It will help the Democrats when DC and Puerto Rico are granted statehood in 2021 adding 4 senate seats. It will make it difficult for the Republicans to control the senate in the following decades.
  10. This is so stupid. Where I am living young people come from the provinces to the bigger cities like Manila all the time because a "cousin" or "aunt" can help them get work. This is not trafficking, it is the way most of the world works for young people looking for new opportunities.
  11. No. I published it in my book The Zero-Point Universe first, so journals would not look at it. I will also say that I am for open-access, so I would not publish in most journals. Lately of have been publishing to GSJournal, which is not peer reviewed in a strict sense, but the editors are competent at performing a review. I also copy my work on researchgate.net and academia.edu, as I often get good feedback there. I still have not found someone to give me access to arxiv, as non-academic researchers like me often get frozen out by them.
  12. Some posters like to attack my science or lifestyle rather than respond to my on-topic posts. I will defend myself from personal attacks but would prefer that they stayed on-topic. As far as vixra goes I know it is mostly garbage but I often put a copy of my papers there because I can get an extra 500 reads.
  13. The recent Emerson poll showed a generic ballot of 49 to 42 favoring Democrats but in the Midwest states it was 52 to 38. There appears to be backlash against Trump in the Midwestern states.
  14. First I will say that it took 100s of physicists to mathematically compute the nuclei using the present fictional forces of the standard model. I will not waste my life trying to replicate that work, so I will leave it to others. Gluons are fictional as opposed to the electrons in quantum field theory being well known experimentally. No force physically arises due to particle exchange so the strong force is magic, rather than physically real. Quantum van der Waals forces are physically real and there is a physical mechanism for how those quantum vibrations push on particles and other objects due to degeneracy pressure. We have a physically real model to explain the Casimir effect. At least we do up to the point of describing the force responsible for degeneracy pressure and the Pauli exclusion principle, but I have a working hypothesis that I hope to develop. You do not have a good grasp of quantum field theory and particle decay, so note that the highest energy quantum fluctuations are the shortest wavelengths. Thus the highest energy Casimir effect is at the closest distances. The distance between nucleons within a nucleus are consistent across all nuclei, so the Casimir effect between any two particles is the same. Adding more nucleons does not reduce the force between any two nucleons. With larger nuclei the force is slightly greater because more longer wavelengths are excluded from the nucleus. However, those are longer less energetic wavelengths, so the effect is a bit smaller. As the protons quantum jump they usually get pulled back in by the Casimir effect because they are so massive that they do not jump far enough to escape. And then a neutron pulls it back in due to the Casimir effect As for decay, those are due to weak interactions that are due to quantum jumps of electrons and positrons. Electrons jump into protons and turn them into neutrons and electrons jump out of neutrons turning them into protons. Mostly electrons just jump around within a stable nucleus, but sometimes one gets captured or escapes. Longer wavelength electron-positron quantum fluctuations cannot exist within a large nucleus since the space is occupied, so the range of the electron jumps is limited except at the outer edges of large nuclei. It is not strange to compute the Coulomb force between two spheres based on the distance between the center of the spheres. As with gravity the effects of a spherical body make it appear that the force is emanating from a point at the center. Review any freshman physics text if you forgot that.
  15. Reproducible, yes. I also should have added logical to my list. Many popular physics theories, or theories in general, fail simple tests of logic.
  16. I base scientific robustness on observations and experiments not popularity contests.
  17. The PFA equation for the Casimir effect is admittedly over-simplistic, but that does not mean it goes away. The Casimir force is always present. Just because you are considering a bigger nucleus does not make the force disappear as you suggest. I leave mathematical grunt work like what you suggest to others. To get the distance between charges add 2 times the charge radius to the distance between the outer surfaces. Coulomb attraction of a sphere assumes that the charge is at the center. I graphed it that way to illustrate the crossing point between the Coulomb and Casimir force. I am sorry if you find that confusing. Helium 3 is stable because the protons tend to align on opposite sides of the neutron. So even when the protons jump around they are still attracted to the neutron by the Casimir forces. I can, for example, call any physicists that agree with special relativity a liar, because special relativity assumes that the quantum field and quantum field theory does not exist, therefor special relativity is a lie. (That does not mean that all relativity theory is a lie.) Most physicists know that the two theories are incompatible and yet they lie about special relativity anyway. Now some deny the existence of the quantum field, the Casimir effect, the Lamb shift, the correction to the g factor, diamagnetism, and quantum van der Waals forces, which are all necessarily part of quantum field theory, so they are a different sort of liar.
  18. Gohmert likes it when Gym Jordan sticks a finger in his ass when they wrestle.
  19. Then I was probably there too. I was always there back then.
  20. https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/a3qz3j/trump-was-like-a-predator-toward-teens-at-parties-in-80s-and-90s-says-bbc-report Trump was a sex pest per a new BBC documentary going to parties with 14 to 17 year old girls.
  21. I just saw that 5 swing voters in the senate, 3 Democrats and 2 Republicans (the usual suspects), declined an invite to the announcement.
  22. You mean the ones who believe they have mindless brains and brainless minds that are non-physical and can somehow occupy a non-physical space yet still communicate with physical reality?
  23. I saw something the other day that compared the presidential winning percentages by state from 2012 and 2016 and looked at the percentage change. The average swing was 4.3% to the Republicans because Hillary sucked as a candidate and Trump's message resonated with many people, much more than Romney. I found it interesting that Texas had the second largest Democratic swing of any state (not counting Utah) at 6.8%. If the Democrats had a much better candidate it could have been 10 points. From that perspective the 5 point difference in the latest UT poll is not surprising. Here are the top swings toward the democrats. California 7.3 Texas 6.8 Arizona 5.6 D.C 5 Massachusetts 4.5 Georgia 2.7 Virginia 1.5 Washington 1.33 Kansas 1 Maryland 0.6 Illinois 0.2 Note the swings of Arizona and Georgia which will definitely be swing states in 2020, with Virginia moving more solidly democratic.
  24. Much of mainstream standard model physics is incompatible with standard model quantum field theory. Since quantum field theory describes the material substance of space itself, all of physics must be compatible with quantum field theory in order to be valid.
  25. It doesn't. Not only that, a hypothetical god violates the principles of physics, because if it couldn't violate the principles of physics it wouldn't be a god. But if it does violate the principles of physics and more generally science and reason, it cannot exist.
×
×
  • Create New...