Rumpelstiltskin theory

[Genady]

1 minute ago, swansont said:

The more pertinent question is does your model predict anything? Theories do more than explain behavior. They must have some kind of predictive power. They have to be falsifiable.

@grayson, help me out here!

[grayson]

2 minutes ago, Genady said:

@grayson, help me out here!

With what?

[Genady]

1 minute ago, grayson said:

With what?

To defend my theory against this:

 

6 minutes ago, swansont said:

The more pertinent question is does the model predict anything? Theories do more than explain behavior. They must have some kind of predictive power. They have to be falsifiable.

 

[grayson]

1 minute ago, Genady said:

To defend my theory against this:

 

 

Your theory? and I am trying to. This dude said that atoms are isotopes.

[Genady]

2 minutes ago, grayson said:

Your theory?

Yes. It is an extension of your theory. I've shared it with you here: 

 

[StringJunky]

1 minute ago, grayson said:

. This dude said that atoms are isotopes.

Proton number defines the element. Neutron numbers in that element defines the isotope variant of that element.

Hydrogen has 3 isotopes: Protium, deuterium and tritium. Protium has no neutron; deuterium has one and tritium has two

[grayson]

2 minutes ago, Genady said:

Yes. It is an extension of your theory. I've shared it with you here: 

 

Oh, I must've missed it. That is a pretty good theory. Are you saying atoms/isotopes/ions/thingamawhatsits that have the magic numbers try to stay stable?

1 minute ago, StringJunky said:

Proton number defines the element. Neutron numbers in that element defines the isotope variant of that element.

Hydrogen has 3 isotopes: Protium, deuterium and tritium. Protium has no neutron; deuterium has one and tritium has two

Yes, but is hydrogen 1 an isotope?

[Genady]

1 minute ago, grayson said:

That is a pretty good theory.

I knew it! Thank you!

[StringJunky]

1 minute ago, grayson said:

Oh, I must've missed it. That is a pretty good theory. Are you saying atoms/isotopes/ions/thingamawhatsits that have the magic numbers try to stay stable?

Yes, but is hydrogen 1 an isotope?

Any of those is an isotope of the others. I suppose custom puts the lowest mass isotope first.

[grayson]

10 minutes ago, Genady said:

I knew it! Thank you!

But can we try to make a mathematical equation for it. Something like e=mc² or the Schrödinger equation?

Also, guys this is getting out of hand! If you want to post in this topic, try to stay peaceful

[Genady]

12 minutes ago, grayson said:

But can we try to make a mathematical equation for it. Something like e=mc² or the Schrödinger equation?

We don't need a new equation. Just extend your equation by inserting ± in it:

+ for the atoms that want to stay, and

- for the atoms that want to change.

[grayson]

3 minutes ago, Genady said:

We don't need a new equation. Just extend your equation by inserting ± in it:

+ for the atoms that want to stay, and

- for the atoms that want to change.

so that means that I = O*C ±

no, I=O*C +

and than I=O/C -

[Genady]

1 minute ago, grayson said:

so that means that I = O*C ±

I'd put it in the other order. You know, similar to

x=±√y

[grayson]

4 minutes ago, Genady said:

I'd put it in the other order. You know, similar to

x=±√y

So that means A=O*±C

[Genady]

Just now, grayson said:

So that means A=O*±C

I rather thought of A=±O*C

[grayson]

Oh yah! Also, I have found how to measure change. The way you measure it is the number of particles (an atom counts as a particle) within one angstrom (100 picometers) over time.

[TheVat]

On 8/19/2023 at 2:40 PM, grayson said:

Photon emitting/Reproduction.

Please, this is not a bosonic porn website.  

 

[grayson]

4 minutes ago, Genady said:

I rather thought of A=±O*C

Oh yah! Also, I have found how to measure change. The way you measure it is the number of particles (an atom counts as a particle) within one angstrom (100 picometers) over time.

Just now, TheVat said:

Please, this is not a bosonic porn website.  

 

Yes i know. Have you ever been to 6th grade biology clas?

[TheVat]

Here's a more tasteful fermion pairing that is family friendly.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooper_pair

 

[grayson]

5 minutes ago, TheVat said:

Here's a more tasteful fermion pairing that is family friendly.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooper_pair

 

You are the one that made this not family friendly. Please keep those comments out of any of my topics

[Genady]

7 minutes ago, TheVat said:

Here's a more tasteful fermion pairing that is family friendly.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooper_pair

 

Family friendly? This is just gay!

[grayson]

6 minutes ago, Genady said:

Family friendly? This is just gay!

okay, back on topic, the eqution is A=±O*C. You know what everything else means. C is the number of particles, including atoms within an angstrom with respect to time.

[TheVat]

On 8/19/2023 at 2:40 PM, grayson said:

If you don't believe me compare these things. Electromagnetism/Metabolism. Photon emitting/Reproduction.

How on Gaia's green Earth is photon emission a form of reproduction?  If you want people to not make jokes or get rowdy, then you need to know your subject and supply a set of testable hypotheses that bear some relation to current knowledge.  Atoms and subatomic particles are not life; life is composed of complex dynamic structures that are built of atoms bonded in molecules.  Theories that particles and atoms are in themselves alive have tended to be in the tradition of a 19th century fad called Vitalism (Bergson called it elan vital,  postulating some sort of ethereal life force) - such theories have been discredited for lack of evidence and coherence.

[grayson]

1 minute ago, TheVat said:

How on Gaia's green Earth is photon emission a form of reproduction?  If you want people to not make jokes or get rowdy, then you need to know your subject and supply a set of testable hypotheses that bear some relation to current knowledge.  Atoms and subatomic particles are not life; life is composed of complex dynamic structures that are built of atoms bonded in molecules.  Theories that particles and atoms are in themselves alive have tended to be in the tradition of a 19th century fad called Vitalism (Bergson called it elan vital,  postulating some sort of ethereal life force) - such theories have been discredited for lack of evidence and coherence.

Okay, if you read the whole topic you would know that I have developed this theory and it is different now! It doesn't matter anymore! stay in the present!

[iNow]

2 hours ago, TheVat said:

Theories that particles and atoms are in themselves alive have tended to be in the tradition of a 19th century fad called Vitalism (Bergson called it elan vital,  postulating some sort of ethereal life force) - such theories have been discredited for lack of evidence and coherence.

Panpsychism is what it drew to mind for me. Also, wasn’t elan vital brother to gore vidal?

2 hours ago, grayson said:

stay in the present!

It’s literally impossible to exist anywhere else.