Mordred Posted August 28, 2019 Share Posted August 28, 2019 When you make no effort to supply the mathematics to support your claims? Why should I believe any of your claims when you can only supply words and pictures ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgard Neuman Posted August 28, 2019 Author Share Posted August 28, 2019 (edited) 1 minute ago, Mordred said: When you make no effort to supply the mathematics to support your claims? Why should I believe any of your claims when you can only supply words and pictures ? Do what you want ! I now what I choose to believe. (I don't think "you can only supply words and pictures" is a valid criteria, but you do what you want). Also that is just a model. I suppose some things have to be adjusted. Exactly how the interaction take place, the set of particles and possible interactions (I just have to be globally neutral).. for instance why the Fine-structure constant (1/137) I have no idea. Edited August 28, 2019 by Edgard Neuman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordred Posted August 28, 2019 Share Posted August 28, 2019 Take the mean average energy density then calculate the mean average energy of the VP. There is a formula that then corresponds this to the mean average lifetime that in itself depends on the mean average energy per particle. It is literally one of the calculations used to calculate the range of a force. 2 minutes ago, Edgard Neuman said: Do what you want ! I now what I choose to believe. You can believe pink unicorns fills magic wands with their urine if you want. That doesn't validate your model Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgard Neuman Posted August 28, 2019 Author Share Posted August 28, 2019 (edited) 1 minute ago, Mordred said: Take the mean average energy density then calculate the mean average energy of the VP. There is a formula that then corresponds this to the mean average lifetime that in itself depends on the mean average energy per particle. It is literally one of the calculations used to calculate the range of a force. And that explain the existence of virtual particle ? The average formula now have powers over matter ? Are you God ? 2 minutes ago, Mordred said: Take the mean average energy density then calculate the mean average energy of the VP. There is a formula that then corresponds this to the mean average lifetime that in itself depends on the mean average energy per particle. It is literally one of the calculations used to calculate the range of a force. You can believe pink unicorns fills magic wands with their urine if you want. That doesn't validate your model My model fits your experiments, eventhough you don't understand how, I do. Edited August 28, 2019 by Edgard Neuman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordred Posted August 28, 2019 Share Posted August 28, 2019 Anyone can understand their own imagination land it's perfectly suited to the individual imagining the scenario. Proving it to others is a different story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgard Neuman Posted August 28, 2019 Author Share Posted August 28, 2019 (edited) 28 minutes ago, Mordred said: Do you want to try that one again ? As I am not buying it. At 2 7 K the mean average number density of photons would be roughly 400 /cm^3 that includes the antiparticle. You don't understand that thousands of physicists would have considered everyday particle number density in the two slit experiment. They would have considered such a mundane possibility Even Feymann considered a classical solution impossible and he is certainly well aware of Brownian distributions. Because he only account for real particle (air etc..).. In my model they are only SOME LOCAL DENSITY ANOMALY of charges in the vaccum. 3 minutes ago, Mordred said: Anyone can understand their own imagination land it's perfectly suited to the individual imagining the scenario. Proving it to others is a different story. I SAID IT FIT YOUR EXPERIMENTS. I try but you obvioulsy aren't even able to picture a field of real particle. Even when I use pictures. Edited August 28, 2019 by Edgard Neuman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordred Posted August 28, 2019 Share Posted August 28, 2019 (edited) Oh really the very people that proposed VP in the first place couldn't consider it's application in a two slit experiment. Feymann for one example that showed how to model VP as an internal line on his diagrams couldn't think of how to apply this to the two slit experiment which he himself examined and specifically stated no classical solution is possible. Yet you can without doing a single calculation Edited August 28, 2019 by Mordred Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgard Neuman Posted August 28, 2019 Author Share Posted August 28, 2019 Just now, Mordred said: Oh really the very people that proposed VP in the first place couldn't consider it's application in a two slit experiment. What are you talking about now. My picture explain how vaccuum density fluctuation behave like waves. (YES WAVES destructive constructive, reacting to slits. WAVES. ) EMERGING FROM CLASSICAL PARTICLE . YES THATS POSSIBLE. Your slit experiment problem you try to pin on my model doesn't exist. SORRY. Just now, Mordred said: Feymann for one example that showed how to model VP as an internal line on his diagrams couldn't think of how to apply this to the two slit experiment which he himself examined and specifically stated no classical solution is possible. NO CLASSICAL SOLUTION IF only accound for real particle, In my model, VP PARTICLE are the vaccum particle. We can go in circle for years this way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordred Posted August 28, 2019 Share Posted August 28, 2019 Do yourself a favor take two spray cans of paint spray it against a wall. What pattern do you see ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgard Neuman Posted August 28, 2019 Author Share Posted August 28, 2019 (edited) 21 minutes ago, Mordred said: Do yourself a favor take two spray cans of paint spray it against a wall. What pattern do you see ? PLEASE. FLUCTUATION DENSITY OF VACCUM PARTICLE. BECAUSE A TYPE OF IT CANCELS THE EFFECT OF THE OTHER TYPE, THE WHOLE THING BEHAVE LIKE A WAVE. A WAVE. IN MY MODEL I SEE INTERFERENCES. If I gave you 10 $, and then I give you 10 anti-$. YOU HAVE NOW 0. THEY MAY BE CLASSICAL AND STILL CANCEL OUT INTO PHOTONS. And even better : the wave have a frequency depending on the vaccum density.. Edited August 28, 2019 by Edgard Neuman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordred Posted August 28, 2019 Share Posted August 28, 2019 (edited) Really how do these antiparticles survive long enough to even be present with baryogenesis that occurred shortly after the BB like you stated effectively leaving us with a positive dominant universe. ? How can they be present in the two slit experiment ? Edited August 28, 2019 by Mordred Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgard Neuman Posted August 28, 2019 Author Share Posted August 28, 2019 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Mordred said: Really how do these antiparticles survive long enough to even be present with baryogenesis that occurred shortly after the BB like you stated effectively leaving us with a positive dominant universe. ? How can they be present in the two slit experiment ? BECAUSE PHOTON CAN INTERACT WITH EACH OTHER TO GIVE ELECTRON AND POSITRON. The interaction is symetrical by time inversion of course . The vacuum contains much more photons : they create pairs when they interact. The interaction may still be classical. You know that positron have to be taken into account in any feynman diagram, or as a field in the mainstream theory. So even in your model they are present as virtual particles I have to explain to you the premise of the model again and again.. ? Edited August 28, 2019 by Edgard Neuman -1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordred Posted August 28, 2019 Share Posted August 28, 2019 Yeah right so you believe this can somehow account for the difference in the particle streams coming from two slits much like those spray cans then hits a uniform density distribution of photons to create vertical lines on a screen. Good luck with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgard Neuman Posted August 28, 2019 Author Share Posted August 28, 2019 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Mordred said: Yeah right so you believe this can somehow account for the difference in the particle streams coming from two slits much like those spray cans then hits a uniform density distribution of photons to create vertical lines on a screen. Good luck with that. This is called the law of big numbers .Learn about that. You only see the stable result, the stable history that remains at the end of mess. And you have to understand the scale : the plank scale, where vaccuum noise exist is much much smaller that structures like atoms or molecule. A electron, is a very very lonely charge density anomalie in a very otherwise sea of equal proportions of both charges For the model to work, the vaccum density (the lenght of particle travelling without interactions) should be so small that it can still explain protons etc.. so yes very different scales. Edited August 28, 2019 by Edgard Neuman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordred Posted August 28, 2019 Share Posted August 28, 2019 Then show your numbers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgard Neuman Posted August 28, 2019 Author Share Posted August 28, 2019 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Mordred said: Then show your numbers Here it is : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_constant You know my model has to fit with all the experiments ever done. So yes, that probably the number you're looking for. Edited August 28, 2019 by Edgard Neuman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordred Posted August 28, 2019 Share Posted August 28, 2019 That's your numbers to account for the vertical distribution that is not what I asked for. I know know what the blooming Planck units are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgard Neuman Posted August 28, 2019 Author Share Posted August 28, 2019 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Mordred said: That's your numbers to account for the vertical distribution that is not what I asked for. I know know what the blooming Planck units are. As I explain you can also view planck constant as frequency of perturbation propagation of the vaccum. (It has to be to fit with wavelength of your model waves). In my model it's like a sound frequency equivalent : the wave of perturbation in the vaccum.. (but different. I don't precisely now how. Picture a sound propagating but with QED interactions) Edited August 28, 2019 by Edgard Neuman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiot Posted August 28, 2019 Share Posted August 28, 2019 24 minutes ago, Edgard Neuman said: I have to explain to you the premise of the model again and again.. ? 1 hour ago, Edgard Neuman said: If you don't see how to explain scattering, wave behavior, and everything from my model, this is just hopeless. I've inform you, use your brain or not, I don't care. I've done my part. You haven't explained it to me once yet. That miscounting is taking lack of mathematics too far. Reported 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgard Neuman Posted August 28, 2019 Author Share Posted August 28, 2019 (edited) ok now the censoreship.. Good for you. Blind yourself and punish the others. That's how science works apparently. I'm so used to it, it's not even painfull anymore. Edited August 28, 2019 by Edgard Neuman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordred Posted August 28, 2019 Share Posted August 28, 2019 3 minutes ago, Edgard Neuman said: As I explain you can also view planck constant as frequency of perturbation propagation of the vaccum. (It has to be to fit with wavelength of your model waves). In my model it's like a sound frequency equivalent : the wave of perturbation in the vaccum.. (but different. I don't precisely now how. Picture a sound propagating but with QED interactions) I know how QED works and I am telling you that without the wave nature in QED you will not get the correct interference patterns. Just now, Edgard Neuman said: ok now the censoreship.. Good for you. Blind yourself. You haven't provided any mathematics that is one of the requirements on this forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgard Neuman Posted August 28, 2019 Author Share Posted August 28, 2019 (edited) 12 minutes ago, Mordred said: I know how QED works and I am telling you that without the wave nature in QED you will not get the correct interference patterns. I'm sorry you don't understand my model. I'll do maybe some computer simulation one day. I've already simulated big classical pools of particles (IfI still can, I will publish here the results, even if they contradict me of course) 12 minutes ago, Mordred said: I know how QED works and I am telling you that without the wave nature in QED you will not get the correct interference patterns. You haven't provided any mathematics that is one of the requirements on this forum. So i may be right (even if you don't understand how), but nobody while never know because of the rules of the forum ? Be the way, anybody (I mean somebody who knows that stuff better than me) can do the math. Please be my guest. (I don't even want to be credited, that's not why I'm here and I respect the work of course) Edited August 28, 2019 by Edgard Neuman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted August 28, 2019 Share Posted August 28, 2019 27 minutes ago, Edgard Neuman said: ok now the censoreship.. Good for you. Blind yourself and punish the others. That's how science works apparently. I'm so used to it, it's not even painfull anymore. ! Moderator Note You agreed to follow the rules of the site, and physics requires mathematical models. That is how science works: models that are testable. This has gone on long enough. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts