No material can have a net negative charge. [Answered: Wrong!]

[swansont]

46 minutes ago, martillo said:

 

I was talking about my model, not the Standard Model.

I guess I was confused by the fact that you said this

"The Standard Model includes "force carriers" travelling at c velocity of light. Isn't this a condition imposed to match with Relativity?"

Don't call your model the Standard Model; that name is taken.

 

[martillo]

9 minutes ago, swansont said:

I guess I was confused by the fact that you said this

"The Standard Model includes "force carriers" travelling at c velocity of light. Isn't this a condition imposed to match with Relativity?"

Don't call your model the Standard Model; that name is taken.

 

Please, seems we both are confusing what the other actually say. In that phrase I was talking about the Standard Model not mine. I don't use the same name for mine. I didn't give a name to my model.

4 hours ago, swansont said:

No, I know that relativity limits information to lightspeed. I am interested in your claim that there is some issue with the standard model owing to relativity.

This way, doesn't Relativity also limit the velocity of propagation of fields and forces like in the "force carriers" too? This is the relation between Relativity and the Standard Model I was talking about.

Edited July 18, 2022 by martillo

[swansont]

4 minutes ago, martillo said:

Please, seems we both are confusing what the other actually say. In that phrase I was talking about the Standard Model not mine. I don't use the same name for mine. I didn't give a name to my model.

So then my request still stands for you to offer up some kind of citation for these alleged issues the Standard Model has with relativity.

[martillo]

11 minutes ago, swansont said:

So then my request still stands for you to offer up some kind of citation for these alleged issues the Standard Model has with relativity.

I was editing while you answering. I will copy my last comment now:

4 hours ago, swansont said:

No, I know that relativity limits information to lightspeed. I am interested in your claim that there is some issue with the standard model owing to relativity.

 

 

17 minutes ago, martillo said:

This way, doesn't Relativity also limit the velocity of propagation of fields and forces like in the "force carriers" too? This is the relation between Relativity and the Standard Model I was talking about.

It is a relation between the Standard Model and Relativity. It is not a problem between themselves. They are compatible in this.

7 hours ago, Eise said:

Use your time to get into the present scientific understanding. Read about quantum theory, quantum electrodynamics, and chemical bonding. Try to find the books that fit to your present understanding, and bring you to a higher level of insight about these topics. I am sure that some of the participants in this thread will help you to find the right books (or maybe even good web pages). I assure you, great new vistas will be opened in your mind.

Let us know, if you need any help to find the right texts for you.

Thank you Eise very much for your advice. If I have something to ask I will count with the forum, thanks.

Edited July 18, 2022 by martillo

[Ni Mimi.]

Eise, first of all, my intention when I quoted Velikovsky was to make the point that even if we make mistakes, there’s room for improvement because we aren’t working; thinking in a straight-jacket environment. So, not that I didn’t understand the gist of what was cutting – to whoever made a mistake, the idea was, rethink; revaluate.

On Immanuel Velikosky’s concepts being surpassed by time, no problem; I noted that a long a time ago.

My statement wasn’t in their context.