zyntiger Posted February 27, 2019 Author Share Posted February 27, 2019 18 minutes ago, Strange said: 1 hour ago, zyntiger said: Relativistic gravity just for fun, no object exerts a force. just Newtonian gravity is used in The actual engineering. This is not true. Yet another thing you are ignorant of. you stay on earth, why? How to explain with Relativistic gravity? How to explain rocket launching with Relativistic gravity? no object exerts a force with Relativistic gravity 21 minutes ago, Strange said: 1 hour ago, zyntiger said: Why participate in gravity if Dark matter doesn't interact electromagnetically. Electromagnetism has nothing to do with gravity. Dark matter is distributed in the same way as gravity intermolecular interaction is similar. 22 minutes ago, Strange said: 56 minutes ago, zyntiger said: The speed of light and the direction will change; Speed of light doesn't change. you should learn gravitational lens and you should know Speed of light in Different media, too. 24 minutes ago, Strange said: 58 minutes ago, zyntiger said: could you give The behavior of 'one' individual particles is fluctuating What does that mean? Particles don't"fluctuate". could you give The behavior of 'one' individual particle wave? 25 minutes ago, Strange said: 59 minutes ago, zyntiger said: 'one' individual particles can not wave. Of course not. Why would you expect it to? electromagnetic wave is wave electromagnetic wave is correct one photon can not wave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted February 27, 2019 Share Posted February 27, 2019 3 minutes ago, zyntiger said: you stay on earth, why? How to explain with Relativistic gravity? Why don't you study some physics and find out, instead of repeatedly demonstrating your ignorance. Are you proud of not knowing these things? 4 minutes ago, zyntiger said: Dark matter is distributed in the same way as gravity intermolecular interaction is similar. Intermolecular attraction is completely different from gravity. This is why dark matter does not "clump". Yet another example of your ignorance. 6 minutes ago, zyntiger said: you should learn gravitational lens And you should learn the difference between proper speed and coordinate speed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zyntiger Posted February 27, 2019 Author Share Posted February 27, 2019 27 minutes ago, Strange said: 1 hour ago, zyntiger said: 1) 'Vacuum' (Dark matter) disassociates electron pairs(many papers: The CDMS II Collaboration, Dark matter search results from the CDMS II experiment. Science. 327, 1619-1621(2010); S. Devons, G. R. Lindsey, Electron pair creation by a spherically symmetrical field. Nature. 164, 539-540(1949).E. J. Williams, Production of electron-positron pairs. Nature. 135, 66-66(1935). H. R. J. Walters. Antimatter Atomic Physics [J]. Science, 330, 762(2010).) I have already explained that the first of these contradicts your claims and the others are irrelevant. if no dark matter, what disassociates electron-positron pair? 'Vacuum' ? nothing? why? 29 minutes ago, Strange said: 1 hour ago, zyntiger said: in my model, Dark matters interact with the electromagnetic force Then your model is wrong because we know it doesn't. Why can't you find dark matter? because The existing model is wrong. you are going Into the erroneous zone! 31 minutes ago, Strange said: 1 hour ago, zyntiger said: could you tell What are the specific causes of gravity? Yet another thing you are ignorant of. So why should anyone take any notice of the stuff you make up (that is contradicted by evidence). Spacetime cannot act as a forcing object no evidence can tell Spacetime can act as a forcing object. There is no attractive force, you will go away 7 minutes ago, Strange said: 13 minutes ago, zyntiger said: you stay on earth, why? How to explain with Relativistic gravity? Why don't you study some physics and find out, instead of repeatedly demonstrating your ignorance. Are you proud of not knowing these things? Spacetime cannot act as a forcing object Newtonian gravity is correct The earth attracts us 11 minutes ago, Strange said: 17 minutes ago, zyntiger said: Dark matter is distributed in the same way as gravity intermolecular interaction is similar. Intermolecular attraction is completely different from gravity. This is why dark matter does not "clump". Yet another example of your ignorance. You don't have any research Dark matter is distributed in the same way as gravity Different objects attract the same dark matter can you think that? 15 minutes ago, Strange said: 21 minutes ago, zyntiger said: you should learn gravitational lens And you should learn the difference between proper speed and coordinate speed. You deny the speed of light but The speed of light can vary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 31 minutes ago, zyntiger said: if no dark matter, what disassociates electron-positron pair? What positron-electron pair? And what does "disassociate" mean? And if anything "disassociates" them, it can't be dark matter because it doesn't interact electromagnetically. We know this. From evidence. 33 minutes ago, zyntiger said: Why can't you find dark matter? If it were electron-positron pairs, we would know because they would annihilate and produce gamma rays. You should know this. As you "know all the science". But the problem is you don't know any science, do you. 34 minutes ago, zyntiger said: Dark matter is distributed in the same way as gravity Dark matter is not distributed like normal matter. That is because it doesn't interact electromagnetically. 35 minutes ago, zyntiger said: Spacetime cannot act as a forcing object The problem is simply the you don't know what you are talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zyntiger Posted February 28, 2019 Author Share Posted February 28, 2019 23 minutes ago, Strange said: 1 hour ago, zyntiger said: if no dark matter, what disassociates electron-positron pair? What positron-electron pair? And what does "disassociate" mean? And if anything "disassociates" them, it can't be dark matter because it doesn't interact electromagnetically. We know this. From evidence. if no dark matter, what ionize into electron-positron pair? And if anything "disassociates" them, it can't be dark matter because it doesn't interact electromagnetically. We know this. From evidence. what evidence? 25 minutes ago, Strange said: 1 hour ago, zyntiger said: Why can't you find dark matter? If it were electron-positron pairs, we would know because they would annihilate and produce gamma rays. You should know this. As you "know all the science". But the problem is you don't know any science, do you. does gamma rays include any electric charge? does gamma rays include any mass? 28 minutes ago, Strange said: 1 hour ago, zyntiger said: Dark matter is distributed in the same way as gravity Dark matter is not distributed like normal matter. That is because it doesn't interact electromagnetically. you should know Dark matter map 30 minutes ago, Strange said: 1 hour ago, zyntiger said: Spacetime cannot act as a forcing object The problem is simply the you don't know what you are talking about. Spacetime cannot be the object that exert force. There's no force without things which put force. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 7 hours ago, zyntiger said: if no dark matter, what ionize into electron-positron pair? There are several mechanisms that can form pairs of particles and antiparticles. This thread is for you to present the evidence for your idea, not to give you an introduction to basic science. Either go and learn some science or start a thread with questions to fill the gaps in your knowledge. 7 hours ago, zyntiger said: And if anything "disassociates" them, it can't be dark matter because it doesn't interact electromagnetically. We know this. From evidence. what evidence? Sigh. It doesn't form into "clumps"; it stays in diffuse clouds around galaxies and other structures. Of course, you won't understand why this is evidence for it not interacting electromagnetically because you are ignorant of basic physics. But there is not much I can do about that. 7 hours ago, zyntiger said: you should know Dark matter map Which demonstrates that it is not distributed like normal matter. 7 hours ago, zyntiger said: Spacetime cannot be the object that exert force. It does not exert a force. Gravity is not a force in GR. You really should know this stuff. Are you not embarrassed to display your ignorance like this? You should be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 12 hours ago, zyntiger said: could you tell us How big is the photon? I can tell you that I can't couple light above a certain wavelength into a 1 micron optical fiber, or send an RF signal above a certain wavelength down a waveguide that's too small. And noting that the energy goes down, therefore the electric and magnetic fields diminish, as the wavelength goes up. So when you are trying to tell me that all photons have zero size, I will ask why I can't do the things I described. Quote Total reflection of light for example,Fiber Optic Communications What about it? You're giving very incomplete answers here, with no real context. I can send light into a vacuum at an angle through glass, You said this can't be done. That's nonsense. Quote could you give The behavior of 'one' individual particles is fluctuating I don't know what this means. Quote 'one' individual particles can not wave. Single particles can interfere with themselves in a double-slit experiment. That's wave behavior of individual particles. Quote Light is electromagnetic wave transmitted by dark matter No, it is not. Quote 1) 'Vacuum' (Dark matter) disassociates electron pairs(many papers: The CDMS II Collaboration, Dark matter search results from the CDMS II experiment. Science. 327, 1619-1621(2010); S. Devons, G. R. Lindsey, Electron pair creation by a spherically symmetrical field. Nature. 164, 539-540(1949).E. J. Williams, Production of electron-positron pairs. Nature. 135, 66-66(1935). H. R. J. Walters. Antimatter Atomic Physics [J]. Science, 330, 762(2010).) 2. Electron-Positron Pair can be produced (in Vacuum) in superstrong electric fields 3. Electron-Positron Pair can be produced (in Vacuum) in an alternating field (Vacuum) 4. Electron-Positron Pair can be produced (in Vacuum) in superstrong magnetic fields(Vacuum) This is not evidence that such pairs are forming stable dipoles. Quote in my model, Dark matters interact with the electromagnetic force And we are asking for the model (i.e. the math) and evidence that this is true. Not vague, incomplete sound bites. Quote this is the first time for the point! could you tell What are the specific causes of gravity? Energy causes gravity (mass being one form of energy, and the most familiar cause). We don't know the reason that it does. But then, we don't know the reason charged particles exhibit the electromagnetic interaction. We observe that they do, and have models for how everything behaves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zyntiger Posted February 28, 2019 Author Share Posted February 28, 2019 7 hours ago, Strange said: 14 hours ago, zyntiger said: if no dark matter, what ionize into electron-positron pair? There are several mechanisms that can form pairs of particles and antiparticles. This thread is for you to present the evidence for your idea, not to give you an introduction to basic science. Either go and learn some science or start a thread with questions to fill the gaps in your knowledge. something ionize into electron-positron pair, but you can't see them. they must be dark matter 7 hours ago, Strange said: 14 hours ago, zyntiger said: you should know Dark matter map Which demonstrates that it is not distributed like normal matter. Dark matter map show that The density of dark matter increases with the density of visible matter 7 hours ago, Strange said: 14 hours ago, zyntiger said: Spacetime cannot be the object that exert force. It does not exert a force. Gravity is not a force in GR. You really should know this stuff. Are you not embarrassed to display your ignorance like this? You should be. Gravity is not a force in GR. so GR is wrong. as a matter of fact, you are attracted by the Earth's gravity. 4 hours ago, swansont said: 17 hours ago, zyntiger said: could you tell us How big is the photon? I can tell you that I can't couple light above a certain wavelength into a 1 micron optical fiber, or send an RF signal above a certain wavelength down a waveguide that's too small. And noting that the energy goes down, therefore the electric and magnetic fields diminish, as the wavelength goes up. So when you are trying to tell me that all photons have zero size, I will ask why I can't do the things I described. wavelength mean wave. wave-particle duality of light didn't tell the truth. Photon and electromagnetic wave theory conflict 4 hours ago, swansont said: Quote Total reflection of light for example,Fiber Optic Communications What about it? You're giving very incomplete answers here, with no real context. I can send light into a vacuum at an angle through glass, You said this can't be done. That's nonsense. Total reflection of light at an Angle you can not send light into a vacuum at an angle through glass. 4 hours ago, swansont said: Quote could you give The behavior of 'one' individual particles is fluctuating I don't know what this means. A single photon cannot wave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiot Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 12 minutes ago, zyntiger said: you can not send light into a vacuum at an angle through glass. Funny how people have been looking out at the heavens through glass for centuries. Some of them have been into space and done this. Reported for trolling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zyntiger Posted February 28, 2019 Author Share Posted February 28, 2019 4 hours ago, swansont said: Quote 1) 'Vacuum' (Dark matter) disassociates electron pairs(many papers: The CDMS II Collaboration, Dark matter search results from the CDMS II experiment. Science. 327, 1619-1621(2010); S. Devons, G. R. Lindsey, Electron pair creation by a spherically symmetrical field. Nature. 164, 539-540(1949).E. J. Williams, Production of electron-positron pairs. Nature. 135, 66-66(1935). H. R. J. Walters. Antimatter Atomic Physics [J]. Science, 330, 762(2010).) 2. Electron-Positron Pair can be produced (in Vacuum) in superstrong electric fields 3. Electron-Positron Pair can be produced (in Vacuum) in an alternating field (Vacuum) 4. Electron-Positron Pair can be produced (in Vacuum) in superstrong magnetic fields(Vacuum) This is not evidence that such pairs are forming stable dipoles. it is difficult that dark matter that include Electron Positron are ionized .it need superstrong electric fields or superstrong magnetic fields if EPDs are not stable, they will be ionized easily. 4 hours ago, swansont said: Quote this is the first time for the point! could you tell What are the specific causes of gravity? Energy causes gravity (mass being one form of energy, and the most familiar cause). We don't know the reason that it does. But then, we don't know the reason charged particles exhibit the electromagnetic interaction. We observe that they do, and have models for how everything behaves. Why does gravity act at a distance 4 minutes ago, studiot said: 18 minutes ago, zyntiger said: you can not send light into a vacuum at an angle through glass. Funny how people have been looking out at the heavens through glass for centuries. Some of them have been into space and done this. Reported for trolling. https://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/refrn/Lesson-3/Total-Internal-Reflection you should learn Total Internal Reflection -2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 50 minutes ago, zyntiger said: something ionize into electron-positron pair, but you can't see them. they must be dark matter You provided two references to the creation of electrons and positrons (S. Devons, G. R. Lindsey, Electron pair creation by a spherically symmetrical field. Nature. 164, 539-540(1949).E. J. Williams, Production of electron-positron pairs. Nature. 135, 66-66(1935)). One of these produces electrons and positrons from the transition of an excited oxygen nucleus to the ground state. Therefore nothing to do with dark matter. The other refers to pair production from two photons. Therefore nothing to do with dark matter. Therefore you have no evidence of dark matter producing electron-positron pairs. (You don't even have evidence of something we can't see producing electron-positron pairs.) 54 minutes ago, zyntiger said: Dark matter map show that The density of dark matter increases with the density of visible matter But not in the same way. Normal matter condenses to form stars, planets, rocks, liquids, etc. Dark matter does not. That is because it does not interact electromagnetically. 55 minutes ago, zyntiger said: Gravity is not a force in GR. so GR is wrong. as a matter of fact, you are attracted by the Earth's gravity. In other words, "I don't understand GR so it must be wrong." Given your impressive ignorance of most areas of science, this is not a very convincing argument. 57 minutes ago, zyntiger said: you can not send light into a vacuum at an angle through glass. And yet you can see into a glass vacuum vessel. So anyone can see that you are wrong. 43 minutes ago, zyntiger said: you should learn Total Internal Reflection Coming from you, that is quite funny. (Reported. Again.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phi for All Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 ! Moderator Note zyntiger, your concept is full of misconceptions, mistakes, and misunderstandings that you refuse to look into. Others are pointing them out, but you're simply continuing as if nothing were wrong. We call that soapboxing here, and it's against the rules. If you can fix the most obvious errors (look back through the thread, they're all pointed out) and rethink your concepts, you can open a different thread on it, otherwise don't bother bringing up ideas you can't support, especially if you make assertive claims about them. Given your obvious lack of formal science education, perhaps you should ask questions about what you don't know, rather than making things up. Thread closed. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts