Гера�им Posted June 28, 2015 Posted June 28, 2015 If we assume that the space is moving at the speed of light, and the particle recciving mass slow down, becomes spin,twists and behaves like a charged particle. May be the cause of electric charge of an electronin the acguisition of the mass?
Strange Posted June 28, 2015 Posted June 28, 2015 If we assume that the space is moving at the speed of light, Why would we assume that? What evidence is there for it? And what is it moving relative to? And which direction is it moving? and the particle recciving mass slow down, becomes spin,twists and behaves like a charged particle. Why would that happen? May be the cause of electric charge of an electronin the acguisition of the mass? There are particles with mass but no charge. How do you explain that?
Гера�им Posted June 29, 2015 Author Posted June 29, 2015 Why not assume thet the space is moving at the speed of light.So hepothetically graviton travels at the speed of light.From vacuum under certain conditions arise photons,which are also moving at the speed of light.These particles make up the space,of course there are other particles that have not been discovered. Regarding the charge of the electron,the electron is one of the smallest particles of matter,if other particles with mass,no charge,they compound.
Strange Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 Why not assume thet the space is moving at the speed of light. What is it moving relative to? Which direction is it moving? How would we measure this movement? So hepothetically graviton travels at the speed of light.From vacuum under certain conditions arise photons,which are also moving at the speed of light. I don't understand the relevance of that. All massless particles ravel at the speed of light. Space is not a massless particle. These particles make up the space They exist in, travel through, space. They do make up space. Regarding the charge of the electron,the electron is one of the smallest particles of matter,if other particles with mass,no charge,they compound. If by "smallest" you mean mass, then neutrinos are less massive (smaller) and have no charge. Other particles have the same mass but opposite charge. Basically, you have provided no reason to connect the movement of space with electric charge.
Гера�им Posted June 30, 2015 Author Posted June 30, 2015 The Big Bang which occurred everywhere reminds me Huygens-Fresnel's principle. We will present that each point of space is a source (secondary waves) of radiation that is new space.For example,the classical law of addition of speeds isn't carried out for light c+c=c here,why? The classical law of addition of speeds is carried out in realy space and if to move with because together with light the new space is created. The neutrino particle is the product of nuclear reactions,it is not primary
Strange Posted June 30, 2015 Posted June 30, 2015 So you are not going to answer any questions or provide any evidence. OK. Good luck with that.
swansont Posted June 30, 2015 Posted June 30, 2015 ! Moderator Note Thus far this thread hasn't been following the guidelines for speculations discussions. Is there evidence which supports this claim? Is it testable?
Гера�им Posted July 2, 2015 Author Posted July 2, 2015 What evidence?At relativistic addition of any speed with the speed of light turns out again the speed of light.If space itself propagates at the speed of light there can be no addition.There is no space there is no addition of velocities. The universe is expanding with acceleration,the further from us the astronomical object the greater its relative speed.The acceleration comes from the fact that the mass of astronomical objects is constantly growing So the expansion we observe in the universe around us astronomical objects
swansont Posted July 2, 2015 Posted July 2, 2015 What evidence? Yes, that's what I am wondering. Do you have an evidence that what you are claiming is true. Is this idea testable?
Mordred Posted July 2, 2015 Posted July 2, 2015 (edited) What evidence?At relativistic addition of any speed with the speed of light turns out again the speed of light.If space itself propagates at the speed of light there can be no addition.There is no space there is no addition of velocities. The universe is expanding with acceleration,the further from us the astronomical object the greater its relative speed.The acceleration comes from the fact that the mass of astronomical objects is constantly growing So the expansion we observe in the universe around us astronomical objectsCompletely wrong with how expansion works. Expansion is not due to astronomical objects gaining inertia. It's due to a change in volume between objects. The objects themselves are not changing in size. Nor is the mass changing in size, whatever that word salad means. http://cosmology101.wikidot.com/redshift-and-expansion http://www.phinds.com/balloonanalogy/ : A thorough write up on the balloon analogy used to describe expansion http://tangentspace.info/docs/horizon.pdf :Inflation and the Cosmological Horizon by Brian Powell As far as particle physics is concerned. The electron can only potentially decay into less massive particles. Particles only decay into less massive particles. Not the other way around. Then you also have your conservation rules which dictate which decays are possible. Conservation of charge, Lepton and baryon number, flavor, energy/momentum, spin, parity, isospin. Edited July 2, 2015 by Mordred
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now