Windevoid

I decided to make a thread just for this. I sent two articles to peer-reviewed journals, one of them to seven different journals. Although some of the journals were published by the same company, each journal is a separate journal, even in a series of journals. (One article is still being checked, but the editor is currently on a vacation or trip.) What happened was the editors just "threw them out". They just said "not suitable" or something. The articles didn't even get to the peer review stage! I don't know what the peer-reviewers would say, but they would probably not even check the claim. I question, then, how science could accept new ideas! I question whether it follows evidence. If articles don't even get to the peer-review stage, then how can the claims ever possibly get checked! How could unusual claims ever get verified? I honestly don't think that claims could be checked with the current system!

I mean if wires were really injecting electrons, then wouldn't you get cancer right off the bat from touching anything electric? But I've touched plenty of batteries and the wires they were connected to. I haven't died or had white growths, yet!!

You don't necessarily need to know how plants work before you can stick a seed in the ground and cover it. Indeed, I don't remember/know at all botany, but it doesn't stop me from sticking a seed of tomato in the ground and expecting a plant in a few months. YouTube Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIuMICiFqmE

http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/75769-is-current-electricity-theory-wrong/?hl=electricity I never really switched the original question. The question was about experiments and proof of not just electrons (we can suppose pretty easily that there are "electrons" whatever they are in atoms), but about them being the supposed main carrier of "charge/electricity" in metal.

Is the quality of evidence discussed in science? The credibility of the scientists? Is care taken to ensure that the evidence actually follows the theory, and not just the idea of the theory? I specifically mean with respect to Newton's "Laws", the "Law" of conservation of energy, Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics.

This is the speculations section, not the philosophy section.

Has nothing to do with actually seeing or heavily inferring "electrons". Just because I can say there's a blue rock on the moon doesn't make it so.

I had a thought back in high school. What if the reason no nukes were detonated after WW2 and why they all look like normal gas explosions was that nukes don't exist the way mainstream physics says? Could have involved pyrotechnics, normal explosives and camera tricks, also. What if maybe Bruce Cathie was right? Can metal really explode? Why only radioactive elements? Could radioactivity be something else? I've seen YouTube videos of plasma cutters "vaporizing" metal or cutting it. No nuclear explosion there. Would a small piece of metal or a small bomb even be able to produce the thick black and gray clouds it the videos? I say no! I could be mistaken, but how would/could I be mistaken?!

You don't necessarily need to know how plants work before you can stick a seed in the ground and cover it. Indeed, I don't remember/know at all botany, but it doesn't stop me from sticking a seed of tomato in the ground and expecting a plant in a few months.

Has anyone even ever proven that electricity is "moving" "electrons" in or around wires? And "electrons" being the main carriers? I don't think they have! Has no one at all has pulled out their microscope to view "moving electrons" in electric wires? I heard about experiments like the Crookes tube, but that doesn't prove anything about "electrons".

Maybe it doesn't speed up?

I don't think time dilation makes sense. Time dilation would say that when you go faster toward the speed of light you go slower, and that is a direct contradiction.

Does any of this commentary have to do with relativity being wrong?

Tesla didn't agree with Einstein, but he got along just fine in his research.

But this thread is called Is Relativity Wrong?

Where did Edison get the glass bulbs for his light bulb experiments and his other equipment? And where did Tesla get his electrical equipment and supplies? Goes ditto for the other electricity guys and women of the era.

Doesn't the paranormal have a big effect on philosophy? Such as UFOs, alien races, ghosts, remote viewing, telekinesis, alternative science, astral projection, near death experiences, Ouija, interdimensional/mystical creatures, alternative electromagnetism, alternative gravity theories, crystal ball scrying, and prophesizing. It has big effects on human origins, the nature of reality, the nature of consciousness, determinism vs. free will, etc. Anyone else thought of this?

then why does Nikola Tesla claim he was wrong? And Tesla claims his experiments worked because he assumed an "ether". NikolaTeslaClub: http://www.nikolateslaclub.com/index.php...n-vs-tesla And the Michelson Morley experiment didn't detect air or neutrinos, either.

How much of the stuff Eric Dollard says is true? I checked Wikipedia. The people he talks about did exist. Did Steinmetz discover free energy? Did Tesla find cosmic rays 30 times the speed of light? Did Alexanderson send signals instantaneously? Did Philo Farnsworth invent fusion? Did Heaviside solve the transatlantic cable problem "mysteriously".

Just saw another UFO today an hour and a half ago. It was white, I think. It was around sunset time. It was stationary, and it wasn't there only a half-hour later.

It's in general.

Are there really answers to the universe and such things as philosophy?

Are there really answers?

You know, like movie, TV and video game magic. Why don't they exist?

The real question is why shouldn't we have magic powers. Can you unrestrict it?