Favourite technological word

Thank you. The last bunch of stuff that I had seen from CERN, and the like, was starting to look more like metaphysics than physics. I had already heard the photon propagation phenomenon. Your explanation brings in something that I had been discounting, which is Heisenberg issues (usually something that I point out to others), where the measurement instrument is directing the results. Time for me to get caught up on my dark matter reading.

Cheers,

Jack

This matter is of conCERN.

So you should.

Almost none of the imaginary particles claimed by the people at CERN really exist.

The entire experiment is flawed and the data is completely misunderstood.

Essentially, none of the objects they claim that are inside a proton exist.

They completely overlooked the theory that stellar fusion makes larger and larger objects.  They assumed that it started with the proton.  In fact, stellar fusion begins much earlier, leaving the proton composed of a huge number of smaller particles.

Since Fermi began, the scientist have been trying to interpret the collision debris to show internal objects instead of conducting valid collision analysis that fully explains that the proton is full of smaller particles people are now calling dark matter.

DAB

Hi Jack,

In my theory, we show that photons are two mass/charged objects that vibrate at a frequency determined by the mass.

That makes all discussions on particle or wave moot.  Most of the wave effects are the result of not understanding the edge effects of individual photons being affected by the mass of the aperture.

We have shown that all photons are involved in discrete exchanges between the source and the absorbing atom.

DAB

Hi Don,

What we found during our analysis was that it was possible for a bubble of captured photons to form into a semblance of a stand alone electron, but any interaction with it usually scattered the photons.

So when you see words like electron flow, substitute photon flow and you will be more correct.  It takes an incredible amount of energy to remove an electron from an atom, but very little amount of energy to induce the exchange of photons.

DAB

I have some strong opinions there too.  To quote another person of great wisdom, "there will be poor always, attend to here and now".

I find looking down 'the rabbit hole' irresistible, myself.  Another part of my mind is upset that public money is used on things like particle colliders.

Hi Jack,

I absolutely love that perspective.

John

Also keep in mind, the planet is infested with all forms of parasite and vermin, with which we share it. Depending on your philosophy, we either; accept them for what and who they are believing they were put here for a reason, or expend significant energy to try and correct things.  All things are relative.  I like to follow the wisdom from the philosopher who was asked "why are we here" and the response was, "because the weeds need carbon dioxide".

Jack

Perhaps I was a little too obtuse. What I meant to say, the study of higher order theoretical physics (dealing with super position and such), can be an unsettling area indeed. Many times you need to set aside your conventions and step off into unknown arenas.  The reference to the rabbit hole was about Alice and how very deep a hole it is indeed. The hole can be encountered either as an adventurer, seeing how far it leads, or as an observer, "yes that is probably a rabbit hole".

I tend to prefer the adventure