Leaderboard

By that logic a Neutron is composed of a Proton, an Electron and an anti-neutrino. Silly me, I thought they were composed of 2 up Quarks, one down Quark and a whole lot of binding energy. And that is the concept you don't seem to grasp; mass/energy equivalence, which explains your 'direct experiment'. And no, mass/energy equivalence is NOT matter/light equivalence. ( although if Conjurer thinks so, you're in good company )

This has to do with the mass/energy of the Higgs boson. Here is the relevant quote from the Wiki article on the Higgs boson... "In the Standard Model, there exists the possibility that the underlying state of our universe – known as the "vacuum" – is long-lived, but not completely stable. In this scenario, the universe as we know it could effectively be destroyed by collapsing into a more stable vacuum state.[33][34][35][36][37] This was sometimes misreported as the Higgs boson "ending" the universe.[h] If the masses of the Higgs boson and top quark are known more precisely, and the Standard Model provides an accurate description of particle physics up to extreme energies of the Planck scale, then it is possible to calculate whether the vacuum is stable or merely long-lived.[40][41][42] A 125 – 127 GeV Higgs mass seems to be extremely close to the boundary for stability, but a definitive answer requires much more precise measurements of the pole mass of the top quark.[32] New physics can change this picture.[43] " From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_boson And this has nothing to do with the temperature of any voids. Also, not being an expert on Differential Geometry, Gauge theory and Topology, I am not so sure a symmetry break travels at the speed of light, as I'm not sure there is information transport. The example which brings this to mind is A Guth's from his original Inflationary theory. Consider a symmetric dinner table arrangement where a fork and knife are placed between each plate. It is certainly symmetric. But as soon as one guest 'breaks' the symmetry by choosing either the fork/knife on his left, or his right, the choice has been immediately made for every other guest at the table. Maybe someone more familiar with this issue can explain.

He should make chips out of them instead. Would likely be better received by the family (unless the reaction of disgust is what he's going for?): https://tasty.co/recipe/apple-peel-chips

Available transitions would be a better way of stating it. (With the caveat that some transitions are "wider" than others, energy-wise)

It's basically not having populated states separated by the energy (and thus wavelength) in question. That becomes much harder to do when you have complex molecules than for individual atoms and simple molecules, because of all the states available once you start combining multiple atoms

Slim possibility = NOT happening soon. What makes you think we are in a false vacuum state ? I think you lied and you haven't read the Wiki page on 'false vacuum'. Come back when you have...

Most of our food waste comes from our garden. We grow much more than we eat, can, or give away. We have a beautiful compost pile. Our chickens do a good job of eating a lot of our over-ripe produce too. Fortunately I'm happy eating the same thing multiple days in a row which also helps keep waste to a minimum.

Take too long to explain if you can't see the basic principles of symmetry breaking with regards to the Higgs field.

Where the he*l did I put my magnifying glass...

Well I would question such a claim unless they could provide a decent peer review article on it. There have been numerous studies of a potential varying fine structure constant. However deep field studies show no variation outside error measurement bars.

I should point out to you that you don’t seem to be following the scientific method, which is a big red flag. You appear to have arrived at a conclusion (electron is composed of photons), and now you are working at making everything fit that conclusion. That is not how science is done. In the scientific method, you start with the data - in this case the known dynamics and properties of electrons -, develop a model to describe that data, and then test that model. If the model does not work, you either amend or abandon it. Crucially, any new model must fit in with all the rest of what we know about physics. If you come up with an idea, and then find yourself unable to abandon that idea even in the face of overwhelming evidence that it doesn’t work and cannot work, then you have a problem. I think you should stop wasting your time with this, and reinvest your resources into learning what we already know about the physics of particles. Only when you are familiar with what we already know, can you make meaningful inroads into what we don’t know yet. Just some friendly advice.

What do you mean? So it can happen in our lifetime? It’s basically the current understanding

First you said it’s not possible and now you stated you didn’t say that so I am confused I am sorry That is my understanding a response stated if the universe falls infer 0 k it can be bad. According to the article this section on space is falling under that and continuing to fall?

You answered but have not said why I am wrong also the light from void has reached us that means the void has also or is about to Also this supervoid is showing there is something now right i am trying to understand this whole post but keep getting different answers

I understand but the cold spot is under 0