1. Why can't fall the electron shell into atomic nuclei?
2. How can decay a neutron into proton and electron if does not contains them?
2a. How can nuclei produce electrons if does not contains them?
2b. How can nuclei produce positrons if does not contains them?
2c. How could particles produce spin property if does not rotates anyhow?
2d. Do quarks exist?
2e. Do gluons exist?
2f . Are there any neutrinos?
2g. Are there gravitons?
3. How can photon produce positrons and electrons if does not contains them?
3a. How can photon produce protons and antiprotons if does not contains them?
3b. Why photons can produce laser beam?
3c. Why laser beam need photons coherent and equal frequencies?
3d. Why photons are not a wave?
4. What is trouble with Michelson experiment?
5. How gravity act at a distance of million light years if it is the weakest force?
5a. What is the trouble's Eötvös gravitational shading experiment?
5b. What is the trouble's with relativity?
5c. Is there any time dilation, length contraction or mass growth?
6. How can matter bend spacetime if it is a mathematical construction and consequently spacetime does not exist in the nature?
6a. How can attraction come out from the black hole if nothing can come out?
7. How could rise Universes from nothing?
7a. How could Universe inflate when maximal velocity would be c?
Lets have a postulate that Universes and matter builds up by only two kind of fundamental energy particles, quantumes. One is the graviton and the other is electric charge fundamental particle. Both massless and have a structure so they have two isomers respectively. The two isomers have mirror structures which cannot be rotated into each other. So they are in all together of four basic, fundamental particles exist. That's all, this four builds up all other particles and radiations:
| Composition | ||
| + | - | I dont know, perhaps neutríno. |
| Ga | + | |
| Ga | - | electron, antiproton. Both are built from the same components. Both are circularly polarized. |
| Gb | + | positron, proton. Both are built from the same components. Both are circularly polarized. |
| Gb + | Ga - | proton + electron = neutron. A neutron is a proton torus snapped into an electron torus. |
| Ga - | Gb + | antiproton + positron = antineutron. An antineutron is an antiproton torus snapped into a positron torus. |
| Gb | - | |
| Ga | Gb | graviton pair, responsible for gravity phenomena. Circularly polarized, ergo there is right and left handed. |
| Ga | + - | |
| Gb | + - | |
| GaGb | + | |
| GaGb | - | |
| Ga - | Gb + | photon. Circularly polarized ergo there is right and left handed. |
Gravitons
Gravitons are the energy itself, their quantity is infinite. Gravitons are the mover, the motor of material world. When two mirror graviton connect each other they produce gravitational radiation, which is the cause of gravity phenomena near masses. That is the pushing gravity. Graviton pairs move as perpetuum mobile in an even path as a DNA like double-helical manner. The pushing force of gravitational radiation (= graviton radiation) acting onto masses are terrible/horrible, but we cannot sense it, because this radiation are isotropic, coming from every direction, except from bottom, from direction of Earth, which shadows a bit, by a very small extent of the whole radiation. The pushing force is 1.2 x 1044 newton.
The velocity of graviton radiation is much more higher than speed of light (c), I guess cca 1 Mc (= cca 1 million c).*
Electric charge energy particles
The electric charge fundamental energy-particles participates the formation of structure of stable and other particles such as proton, electron, antiproton, positron, photon or perhaps neutrinos or muons.
A so called neutrons with quarks does not exist, likewise proton, which does not contain quarks also, because quarks not exists.
Otherwise quite absurd thing to assume 1/3 fundamental charge inside quarks, because in this case the 1/3 charge would be the elemental charging unit, that is the one whole charge, not 1/3. But if we would be confess this so we would be in trouble with the charge of the electron, which would give 3 integers, despite the fact that the electron is considered by science to be elementary particle and quark-free.
However, the electron has already been split in two, separating its two properties into individual particle forms. The spin property is carried by the spinon, while the electrical charging property is represented by the particle called holon, where the spinon is the graviton elemental particle.
The neutron** always build up by a proton (torus) inside an electron torus. In this manner neutron contains both electric charge elemental particles, one inside a proton and the other -mirror counterpart- inside the electron torus. ****
The torus structure means a two component system, where a graviton rotates in a circle and an electric charge particle orbits them. The trajectory of electric charge trace out the torus surface. The core is the graviton.
When the graviton just closed in perfect circle are the cases of stable particles, eg. proton, antiproton, positron, electron. Neutrons always a pair of stable particles, namely a proton inside an electron torus. If graviton cannot closed into perfect circle so that particles are unstable and its spiralling out, like in this cloud-chamber photo.
Strictly just two frequency are where graviton can close to perfect circle, one of electron/positron case at 0.511 MeV and the other is at much more higher energy, that is for proton/antiproton case.
Mass
The two fundamental energy particles are massless. The mass property spring up when the two particle - graviton and electric charge - interconnect with eachother and they step on a circular orbit as in case of proton, electron or positron.
Photon is a bit complicated, because photon is made up by all the four kind of elemental particles, namely graviton A and B and electric charges labeled plus and minus. This four particles orbits eachother during moves at the speed of light. A series of cross sections then shows the classical, ancient yin-yang symbol. This structure allow us to attach mass property for the sweeping photon.
Since a stationary photon does not exist, the phrase of "rest mass of the photon is zero" loses the meaning. Virtually can be stop the photon if the photon move outwards starts at the event horizon. However the photon is still moving just as fast, but it's being blown inward by a "graviton wind" at exactly speed of c, and it seems to be standing still. More precisely non-visibly, because we can never see it. However, a photon that starts outside the event horizon slowly climbs out of the gravity pit and gradually accelerates to reach the Earth observer.
Based on the above idea we may associate mass property for a graviton pair also, correspondently for Dark Energy which is simply the gravitational radiation. No, it is not accelerate the Universe expansion, because this accelerating phenomena is erroneous, it is a measurement error only.
The Higgs idea is a dead end, a search that consumes horrendous money could only have found the elemental energy particle graviton at best, but in fact nothing was found, the Nobel was hasty.
From a lot of trillion registered collisions they selected of a few ten events and shouted into the world with Higgs Bozon, but in fact they only measured background noise.
However, Graviton has already been detected when the electron was pushed over on a nano crystal sheet layer and because they didn't know that one of the vertices was graviton, they named the new particle to Spinon which carries the spin property of the electron (in red curve). The other peak - Holon- is responsible for the electric property of the electron (blue curve), this is the other elementary particle beside graviton. There is no more, just these two elementary energy quantum, all the rest of the particles and radiation are made up of these two ingredients.
Dark Matter
The exotic dark matter that is feverishly searched does not exist. The missing amount of unseen matter in galaxies is simply molecular hydrogen. The H2 is not visible with terrestrial telescopes because its weak IR lines are absorbed by the air layer. Therefore physicists mapped the amount of matter in the Universe at visible wavelengths and accordingly, with atomic hydrogen at 21 cm. However, as a consequence there is the lack of gravitationally necessary material of about 90 percent. What else they could have done, they invented some nonexistent exotic substances such as wimps, axions and the like.
The missing dark matter, or molecular hydrogen, was found as soon as an IR Spectroscope was launched above the atmosphere. The amount of H2 observed is roughly ten times the amount of atomic hydrogen originally calculated and thus the cause of the misery of dark matter has become obsolete.
The Webb Telescope is suitable for detecting molecular hydrogen so you can expect a more detailed examination of the true nature of dark matter.
1. Why can't fall the electron shell into atomic nuclei?
Nuclei does not containes neutrons, quarks nor gluons, this particles not exist. Nuclei consists only protons (toruses) inside nuclear (binding) electrons (a 3 times bigger toruses), like this example B17 nucleus. Electrons from outer electron shell cannot converge to nucleus because the nuclei are overlayed by nuclear electrons. K electrons incidentally able to this approach but this is a rare instance, eg. Ar37 or Ca41.
The electron capture usually take place by photon absorption since photon easily approach nuclei. A photon with appropriate frequency hit the electron poor isotope and the photon decays into an electron and positron, where electron captured by nucleus and the rest of positron emitted. These isotopes are the beta+ emitters eg. Ar31-35, Ca35-39 and many more.
This strange pair production is very unusual, because we know pair production only by 1.022 MeV or higher photons. We need to try illuminate b+ emitter isotopes with this higher frequency photons for accelerating radioactive decays.
2. How can decay a neutron into proton and electron if does not contains them?
Neutrons does not contain quarks. Any neutron consist by a proton torus inside a bigger electron torus. This structure a bit labile and decay with half life cca 10 minutes. The result naturally a proton and an electron. So the neutron yes, contains proton and electron duo.
A star bigger than 1.4 Solar mass at the end of his life becomes a neutron star. The increased pressure presses electrons into the nucleus and proton toruses snaps into electron toruses, katt, katt, katt. The neutron is ready. Probably longer chains something like this structure: Ne22. Inside neutron star this structure may have ten more electron - the whole electron shell.
From neutrons inside nucleus the electrons cannot fall down easily, because electrons are guided by neighbour protons. So neutrons inside nuclei are quite stable. We can say a proton can stabilize a neutron as in this example H2 Deuterium.
2a. How can nuclei produce electrons if does not contains them?
Because it does contains. Nuclei consist only two component, protons and binding nuclear electrons. Isotopes containing relatively high number of nuclear electrons on the central proton nanotube so electrons push aside each other and the terminal electron can fall off and emitted as b- radiation according to this example, B12 b- decay. The remnant nucleus is a stable C12.
2b. How can nuclei produce positrons if does not contains them?
Nuclei poor of binding nuclear electrons can bind an other electron from outside. Electron shell the plausible source but the nuclear surface are negatively charged by nuclear binding electrons so outer electrons cannot approach nuclei. Fortunately, because otherwise the electone shell would collapse into the nucleus. In some cases, K electron capture is possible, but in most cases the electron comes from a photon, as in case B8 isotope. The photon does not contains electron but contains the electron ingredients. So a photon with appropriate frequency can serve the necessary electron which absorbed into nucleus. The rest of the pair production is a positron and emitted as b+ radiation.
2c. How could particles produce spin property if does not rotates anyhow?
Rotates. Inside the torus there is two fundamental energy particles. One is the graviton circulates as a core and the other is an electric charge orbits around graviton. The path of electric charge trace out the torus surface.
Quarks do not exist. In the neutron, a negatively charged region can be discovered at a distance of about 0.6 fm from the center, which is already difficult to match the 2 negative charged downquark. However, there is no trace of a negatively charged quark particle in the proton. Consequently, the Quark model is an unviable lie.
In contrast, the negative charge density at 0.6 femtometers corresponds to a torus of core electrons, which is about three times the diameter of the positive charge density at 0.2 fm from the proton center, which corresponds to the proton torus.
At the center of the particles, according to the torus structure, the charge density is zero.
1. There are no charges in the center of the proton, the proton is empty, there are no quarks here, neither upquarks nor downquarks, because the proton is a torus.
2. The positive charge is located at a distance of 0.2 fm from the center because the proton is a torus.
3. The negatively charged quark should also be located at a distance of 0.2 fm from the center, if there were one. But there isn't. Consequently, downquark does not exist.
4. There are no charges in the center of the neutron, the neutron is empty, there are no quarks here, neither upquarks nor downquarks, because the neutron is two toruses.
5. The positive charge is located at a distance of 0.2 fm from the center because it is a proton torus.
6. The negatively charged quark should also be located at a distance of 0.2 fm from the center, if there were one. But there isn't.
7. In contrast, the neutron contains a negatively charged particle at 0.6 fm, which is an electron torus.
Do not exist. There are bonding electrons in the nucleus and these electrons glue the protons together. A core electron can bond usually two, but can hold up to three protons stably together. But no more than that.
They probably do not exist. Pauli tried to solve a problem that does not exist in reality. Neutrinos
I must say that gravitons exist almost exclusively in infinite quantities. Eternal moving energy quantums, a true perpetual motion particles, their estimated speed is about 1Mc. In pairs, they cause the phenomenon of gravity.
The other existing energy particle is the elementary electric charge, connected to gravitone it form the material we know normal matter, for example, the proton.
The number of Universes is infinite, and the Universes are where the electric charges are concentrated. Universes are pulsating, there have been an infinite number of Big Bang, these are real explosions. The Crunch that occurs at the speed of gravitone radiation and the Big Bangs are operated by the horribly compressive force of gravitone radiation.
3. How can photon produce positrons and electrons if does not contains them?
Yes, photon does not contain positron and electron but contains the ingredients, all of the four fundamental particles such as graviton A and B as well as electric charge plus and minus. The mirror pair graviton A and B goes in a DNA like path while charges orbits around them. Depending the arrangement of 4 particles to each other the photon shows electric and after a quarter wavelength magnetic properties.
If an appropriate photon hit a nucleus it can split into two half, both contains a graviton and a charge. If the frequency be sufficient so the two half can set on circular orbit. Electron and positron have arised.
3a. How can photon produce protons and antiprotons if does not contains them?
As in 3. point above, but much more higher frequency photon involved. Antiproton and proton have arised.
An important consequence this, that positron and proton are the same matter! Only their frequencies are different. For an electron not only positron of his antimatter, but proton too !! The antimatter here's in front of our eyes. But proton can not annihilate with his antimatter electron, because for formation of a photon need two equal frequency half such as electron positron pair.
So there is no need to search lacking antimatter in the Universe.
3b. Why photons can produce laser beam?
Photon is not a fundamental particle and NOT a wave. The photon is a 4 component energy particle with two mirror electric charge energy quantum orbiting around two mirror graviton. For arising laser "crystal beam" there need photons be monochromatic and coherent. In that circumstances photons can attach each-other by their electric charge particles once vertically and an 1/8 of wavelength later horizontally.
If the distance between the photons in the grid is marked with d, the distance from each other's of the same sign of adjacent charges is always d, however, the distance between charges with opposite signs is always less than d.
3c. Why laser beam need photons coherent and equal frequencies?
If photons are not coherent or have not the same frequencies the "crystal beam" broken and stabilizing electric forces not emerged.
3d. Why photons are not a wave?
Because photon is a particle, a four component energy particle. The wave property is just a periodically changing nature of photon as once electric and a quarter of wavelength later magnetic character become conspicuous. This sinusoidal change in property seems to be wave function of photon particles.
If the 4 elemental particles in the cross-sectional image of the photon falls on a straight line so the electric charge (+) positioned between the 2 graviton (A and B) and so the (+) charge shielded by gravitons and photon shows outward the other electrical charge (-), in this case on image at top position.
After 1/4 wavelengths the 4 elemental particles are located in a rectangular shape on the cross-sectional view of the photon and the 2 electric charges neutralizes each other so the photon exhibits an outwardly magnetic property. The magnetic property is represented by graviton elemental particles.
This sinusoidal alternation of properties appears to be a photon as a wave. But photon NOT a wave.
4. What is trouble with Michelson experiment??
The problem with the Michelson experiment is that it is based on a fallacy, a mistake, the Michelson experiment is not suitable for detecting the ether's wind.
First of all, rotating the device with 90 degrees the light rays exchanged with each other, so no any band shift would be expected. Secondly, the device can not distinguish between delta T run time and negative delta T run time, on which the entire MM experiment was founded. While rotating the device, the runtime differences appearing in the two arms are exactly equalize each other, so stripe shift is not to be expected.
The Michelson instrument and their millions of clones were rotated around the wrong axis in which cases the stripe shift are not expected.
However, rotating one of the arms as an axis, we can already expect a stripe shift and can be detect the movement of the Earth in outer space, unless this axis is pointing in the direction of the speed. With this method, it is possible to determine the direction of the Earth movement: the axis direction in which the interferometer cannot measure any stripe shift by rotating it manually around this axis, will shows the direction of movement of the Earth.
The speed of the Earth in the Universe can be detected by Silvertooth one-way device. According to his measurements, the Earth moves towards the constellation Crater/Leo at a speed of 378 km/sec.***
5. How gravity act at a distance of million light years if it is the weakest force?
Because it is not the weakest but the most powerful acting force in Nature, the pressurization of gravity radiation is unimaginably huge. What is weakest is the absorption of radiation in baryonic matter. Thus, the gravitational shadow is effective at billions of light-years away and it can also trap even galaxies or galaxy clusters.
If gravity were the weakest force, and as many orders of magnitude weaker than electromagnetic force as current physics claim, it would have to weaken further by the square of distance. The clustering of galaxies can only work if the effect is significant from thousands of light-years away also, which is only possible by shielding the graviton radiation. This is because the bodies cover a graviton beam corresponding to their diameter, which is 'missing' even at thousands of light-years away.
The gravitational effect decreases proportionally to the square of the distance because the mass causing the absorption is seen at an ever smaller angle, so the mass is absorbed from the endless sea of graviton at an ever smaller angle as the distance increases.
To resolve this apparent contradiction, I suspect that the distance-squared relation no longer works at very long distances, thus, for example, at distances of between a thousand and a hundred thousand light-years, the gravitational effect is more similar in size and does not decrease proportionally to the square of the distance. This would explain the formation of galaxy clusters.
If this were not the case, the gravitational force, which was supposed to be very weak, would disappear at greater distances, converge very quickly to zero, and clusters would disintegrate, meaning they could not even form.
In the case of shielding, however, the gravitational force does not converge to zero at very long distances, because the obscured beam (considered tubular) is absent regardless of distance.
In summary, the gravitational effect from shielding can be divided into two parts
- a direct tubular shield that acts over an infinite distance, called zero degrees, and
- a shading at an angle of 0-90 degrees (referring to the gravitational effect on a person standing on the ground, which extends bottom from the vertical direction named zero degrees to the horizontal direction corresponding to 90 degrees).
The distance-squared attenuation of the gravitational effect is valid for angles other than the vertical, while in the direction called zero degrees, the gravitational effect does not decrease to any extent, which also explains the Pioneer anomaly.
5a. What is the trouble's Eötvös gravitational shading experiment?
The trouble is that it contains a logical error. Eötvös wanted to shielding the attractive gravity which does not exist. If he were aware of the concept of pushing gravity he could not have ignored the effect of upper lead kvadrants in his experiment. In this case, the compilation of the shielding experiment is unsuitable for the desired purpose. However, he has undoubtedly succeeded in showing that attractive gravity does not exist.
Shielding of gravity can be detected at solar eclipse. When the Sun and Moon are aligned, the Earth observer can observe a decrease in the gravity effect of the Sun-Moon system compared to when they appear close to each other (immediately in contact a protruding gravity enhancement may observed, but let we now disregard it).
Allais effect, Saxl and Allen torsion pendulum, Wang eclipse, Magyari tilting of radio tower
Bright example of shielding gravity is the perception of gravitational waves, which is nothing more than the chirping of black holes circulating around each other's with growing speed, an amplified version of the eclipse, strictly speaking there is an accelerated series of black hole eclipses.
Both black holes swallow graviton radiation. Chirping can be seen when the orbiting planes of the two objects are accurately facing us. In this case, the two astronomical objects are alternately obscured by each other and thus from this direction the intensity of graviton radiation is it shakes a tiny little bit because, in obscuration, the BH closer no longer swallows the original graviton radiation, but the one already weakened by the farther one. This change in intensity, vibration is detected by LIGO. When covering, an increase in gravitational radiation is observed relative to the side-by-side position. The combined gravity effect of the two celestial objects is larger if they are side by side and smaller during in eclipse.
Time difference of Hanford and Livingston sensors, based on the image of chirping however not convincing, in my subjective opinion rather the signals arrived at the same time.
5b. What is the trouble's with relativity?
The problem with it is that it is completely misinterpreted. Einstein set up a mathematical model trying to model gravity. With more or less of success. However, the conclusions are treated as if the concept of space time would be a thing in reality, for example, that spacetime can inflate or expand. But this is about a level misunderstanding as if we said the logarithm function is straighten by the effect of the substance, for example, if we hit it with a hammer or hit by a car.
The mathematical model of spacetime describes the gradient of gravitational radiation, well or poorly. The model can be used in everyday life, but completely misunderstand extreme conditions, such as the area of black holes and specifically the inside, where singularity is imagined since on the contrary, gravity does not converge to infinity but to zero. Thus, the error made by the theory of relativity approach to infinity, moreover, the error committed is of infinite magnitude.
Because if we are approaching toward the center of gravity of any body, the gravity tends to zero.
5c. Is there any time dilation, length contraction or mass growth?
No, none of any. The clocks walk equally, but they look different. Objects are the same length but look different and the weight doesn't change.
- Time dilation: started with the Hafele and Keating experiment that is net fraud. Clocks walked so badly that they would not have been used for such purposes. Four atomic clocks were travelled around the Earth with the interruption of about 15 landing take-off when the clocks were aligned with each other before departure in each case. The end of the manipulation was that the required result came out. If only the best-working 447. clock were taken into account - and they wouldn't have smudged it with the other three low-performing clocks on average - then no time dilation result would have been obtained. The No. 447 clock proves that time dilation does not exist.
Additional experiments are based on the lies that these hasty experiments are the repeates of the Hafele Keating. Not once again repeated. They did something else. In a much shorter run, with even fewer clocks and the exclamation that the clocks used are now more accurate. What is possible in laboratory conditions. But with exiting from lab, the delivered, flying clocks are no longer under control and was one or only one two atomic clocks have been travelled in the short term. No ordinary publication, not available of the experimental circumstances as well as antecedents and afterlife of the clocks.
And the muons? The vast majority of muons arise in the stratosphere during the encounter of cosmic radiation with air and they shouldn't get to the surface of the Earth based on their mean free path. But the smaller part of cosmic radiation does approach the surface of the Earth and creates muons near the surface of the Earth which can now access surface detectors for which no relativistic increase of life time is required.
And the crowned king of fraud is GPS. Because the walking of GPS clocks is artificially changed to see it from the ground surface to be accurate. And since they seem accurate despite the corruption, this would be the definitive proof of time dilation.
But no any GPS clock was returned yet!
Without it, no time dilation can be detected but only changing the frequency which no one has never been disputed.
- Length contraction: the body's own length does not change. Then what are we talking about? Does it look different? Alright, it seems otherwise.
- Weight increase: It is also a delusion. In particle accelerators, particles are accelerated by electromagnetic means, which means, by definition, an acceleration force at the speed of light. The particle accelerated around the speed of light is "caught up" in the acceleration force with less and less efficiency and therefore becoming more and more difficult to accelerate the particle. This effect is evaluated by particle physics as mass growth. But the mass of the particle does not change because it is dictated by the internal circulation of the particles. Because stable particles are toruses.
6. How can matter bend spacetime if it is a mathematical construction and consequently spacetime does not exist in the nature?
Nohow.
6a. How can attraction come out from the black hole if nothing can come out?
It doesn't come out because there are no any attraction forces. Gravity is also a compressive force, so its no need to come out.
7. How could rise Universes from nothing?
It was not generated from nothing or in other languages not from singularity because the substance is not generated and not lost, it only transforms. The material is eternal. The material is only two types of elementary particle, one of the graviton and the other is electric charge energy particle. Both are infinite amounts, do not arise and do not miss.
The operation of the Universes is cyclical, the driving force is gravitational radiation consisting of gravitons. Black holes fuse with each other, galaxy cores collect stars, galaxy clusters collect galaxies. Eventually, a black hole grows so large that it stands on its own feet and gravitational radiation begins to swallow neighboring galaxies, the process has been lost in control and now, regardless of orbits, pulses, the gravitational radiation sweeps galaxies into the master black hole. The process accelerates to the speed of gravitational radiation that ends with the absorption of the total material of the Universe.
But the absorption of graviton radiation does not end, so the radiation something like pump up the master black hole.
And this blasts up, it will be the newer Big Bang. There are an infinite number of Universe and there was an infinite number of Bangs.
Universes are not the same because they have different states of development. Only a few are habitable, just think that there are not even elements in the early Universes, then just a few e.g. hydrogen and helium possibly some lithium. Then there is no life on the stars, these still have to explode and then they can only create planets.
7a. How could Universe inflate during 10-30 second when the maximal velocity would be c?
The Universe does not inflate, space-time does not exist and the speed of light is not a maximum speed.
The master black hole explodes at the speed of gravitational radiation which is about a million times the speed of light. This seems to be inflation to physicists but not the space expands. How it could inflates anyway, since space is only a mathematical construct which is a very useful idea, but it cannot expand. Because it does not exist.
Heisenberg's view that if we go down in the structure of the substance we come to such small particles, the only way to observe with light photons or electrons is to knock it by this illumination. However, it is now impossible to accurately measure or calculate the position and pulse of such a tiny object simultaneously. Now then, we can measure them separately.
But who was the crazy who came to the conclusion (Bohr), that then the particles do not have a definite position or god forbid's momentum. Upon this logical leap, then, an entire "industry" was built with blurry waving electrons and light waves by proclaiming that these particles are waves at one time and, at other times, they may even be particles for a moment. The Heisenberg uncertainty relation is based on this, the particle-wave dualism of matter.
However matter is not a wave, but a particle in any form.
These particles then show wave properties under appropriate conditions whose illustrative example the photon and sinusoidal alternating properties from the consequent of structure.
The misinterpretation and "personalization" of these property changes lead to the particle-wave misunderstanding.
Otherwise, if, for example, the electron was not a particle but some kind of blurry wave, then the electron microscope would not give a sharp image. But it gives.
To be continued..
 |
 |
Summary |
| rohan.janos@med.u-szeged.hu |
* The speed of light is NOT constant. We only can measure light velocity by horizontally installed rotational devices with sufficient precision. Pound and Rebka experiment proves the increment in speed of light downward (+ 7.36 x 10-7 m/s, = 2.5 x 10-15 c / 22.5 meter).
** Models of the Atomic Nucleus: Quarks not exists. Analysis of Same-Atomic-Weight Isotopes: Neutrons not exists. Neutron
*** The COBE measurements confirms 371 km/s rush toward Leo/Crater constellation.
**** Electric forces may bind nucleus.
