AP's 255th book of science// "The history of Old Physics and the history of Old Math" Archimedes Plutonium
3m views
255th
AP's 255th book of science// "The history of Old Physics and the history of Old Math"
Archimedes Plutonium
3:11 PM, 1Aug2023
to
On Tuesday, August 1, 2023 at 11:57:58 AM UTC-5, Enes Richard wrote:
wtorek, 1 sierpnia 2023 o 09:55:56 UTC+2 Archimedes Plutonium napisał(a):
I do recall some of Feynman history concerning his opinion of Standard Model in Physics. His comment, words to the effect "I see no use in playing Algebra games in Physics" referring to the Standard Model.
Critics of AP often level that attack on AP-- my work is numerology. Yet, those same critics never see anything wrong in Murray Gell-Mann, Sheldon Glashow, Peter Higgs, Steven Weinberg with their protons, neutrons, electrons as "balls" that have no
function, and where these Standard Model physicists play around with numbers in a algebra jigsaw puzzle.
Contrast that with AP's New Physics where the proton is 840MeV as a torus with 840 windings and inside the torus resides a 105MeV muon as the Atom's electron doing the Faraday law inside the proton torus as it thrusts through the torus at nearly the
speed of light producing electricity for which the neutrons are parallel plate capacitors storing this electricity.
So Old Physics with Murray Gell-Mann was algebra games and 3 quarks with balls as particles that do nothing except maybe fly around in circles around a dense nucleus of balls that do nothing. A picture really quite childish and stupid, yet they win a
Nobel physics prize for this stupidity. Prizes for numerology in physics.
And this was circa 1960s of numerology of 3 in physics, but the Engineers in 1960s were paying attention to this horrible numerology in physics that wins prizes, and not to be left out of the party-making. The engineers reflected on whether 3, the
number 3 was also a backbone and foundation of sorts in engineering. And the engineers did not have far to look to see of 0 to 1/3 and 1/3 to 2/3, and 2/3 to 1, makes for a Middle Thirds.
And the Eastern Religions of Buddhism with Eightfold Way and Middle Third Path was not lost on engineers in the 1960s onward. And so it came to be, that Physics was seeped in the stupidity of numerology and engineering would want some of that party
and merriment.
But, what is flawed with both the physics and engineering numerology of 3, is the fact that truth in science ends up with Experiments. And Demonstrations are indeed experiments.
AP's recent experimentation into proving Water is H4O, not H2O is an experiment that throws out the Standard Model of Old Physics, completely throws it out and onto the trash pile of shame. For H4O requires proton and muon and neutron and magnetic
monopoles to have jobs and tasks and function, and not be a mindless idiotic ball that does nothing and is counted in some number algebra game.
And as for the Engineering mindrot of Middle Third Rule, a demonstration is required. A demonstration is demanded, not just a paragraph of words with tension and stress and resultant force, a incomprehensible paragraph. No, a demonstration of
something following the Middle Third Rule and another apparatus that fails the Middle Third Rule. Then, when someone asks, what is the Engineering Middle Third Rule? What is it? And the answer is-- you make apparatus A and apparatus B that does not
follow the rule. And watch how B falls apart.
One experimental set is enough (previously described) - a cuboid pole made of cuboid rubber bands stacked on top of each other and a match at the very top transmitting the load/force.
Sadly, though, numerology crept into physics and engineering in the 20th century, was heavily rewarded, but now must be seen as the charaltan of science it was.
It is admirable that Feynman was opposed to the Standard Model, but he should have been more vehement in his opposition. Every King or Queen of science must be vocal in the future. And sometimes the King or Queen will get it wrong, but they must be
active and vocal.
AP, King of Science
I think Feynman compromised because there was no alternative model for the structure of the nucleon. He was familiar with experiments with fast electrons passing through a proton and being scattered (as in Rutherford's experiment) and reserved the name
PARTON for the nucleon component. Quarks were to fulfill this role until a better structure model was found.
There are probably over 7,300 partons in nucleons (hence the multitude of different particles after collisions). Partons are about the size of an electron and are about a million times as far apart. They easily pass the test of fast electrons (which
are made up of at least 4 partons)...probably.
Yes, I was going to bring up the Feynman Parton theory which is also bogus.
Feynman was attacking String theory more than he was Standard Model.
I should write a book on "The history of Old Physics and the history of Old Math"
The history of Old Math is more clearcut with time boundary. For Old Math is Reals as numbers with a continuum and utterly no valid proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus ever possible in Old Math. There is the year 2013 in which clearly New Math
starts with the correct number system.
Know what Numbers really are, not some sack of crap cobbled together in a junk pile called Reals
History of discovery: can be pinned to the year 2013 where Grid Numbers replaces the Reals. I needed discrete numbers not a continuum and by 2013 I started True Calculus, where I need empty space gaps between discrete numbers, in order for calculus to
exist.
When does Old Physics end? All the physics up to year 2016-2017 is Old Physics and what is its characteristic feature?
Old Math is all the math up to 2013, and its characteristic feature is having the correct Numbers that compose mathematics, and those correct numbers allow one to do a Geometry and a Valid proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. Before 2013, Old Math
never had a valid proof of calculus. They tried with their stupid "limit analysis" hoping that no-one would notice that just because you analyze something does not mean you
"proven something".
But what is the transition year for Old Physics to go into New Physics, the true physics? I could say the year 1990 wherein the Atom Totality theory starts to take over all the sciences, even mathematics as it says that physics dominates over math, where
math is just a small closet or attic space of physics, for geometry exists because Atoms have different shapes and sizes and numbers exist because atoms are numerous.
In a sense, Old Physics and Old Math really end with the year 1990 because of Atom Totality Universe. But in this book I am specific about complete and utter breakdown of Old Math and Old Physics. Where they are a complete joke as science.
For math the complete joke of Old Math is that it is painfully aware by 2013, they never had a valid proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus and could never have a proof, not as long as they kept their Reals with its continuum. In a sense, Old Math
killed calculus, they nuked it out of existence with Reals and their continuum.
But for Old Physics, things went horribly horribly wrong for Old Physics not just 1990 with Atom Totality, but specifically by 2016-2017 when AP discovered that the neutron at 940MeV is really composed of 9 muons within Sigma Error. Also the proton
registered at 938MeV is actually 945MeV within sigma error, meaning that the true proton is only 840MeV with a muon stuck inside doing the Faraday law. By the year 2016-2017, Old Physics is seen as a dead, decaying science. Seen as idiots who think the
neutron and proton and electron are tiny balls, either whizing around at nearly speed of light, or just clumped together in a fictional nucleus. The idiot Ball picture of subatomic particles with no jobs, function or purpose.
The faculty of physicists at all universities across the globe at this moment are "subatomic particles and atoms as stick and ball figures, most doing nothing but maybe sipping lemonade on a nuclear beach" while that tiny 0.5MeV electron of theirs
whizing crazily around the nuclear beach at nearly speed of light, and everyone in the subatomic world having no function." That picture of Atoms marks the end of Old Physics with their mindless pictures of proton, neutrons, electrons and atoms as balls.
For in 2016-2017, AP sees that the proton is 9x105MeV means the proton itself is only 840MeV as a torus of 840 windings with a 105MeV muon as the true electron inside the proton torus doing the Faraday law. And that AP sees the neutron is a parallel
plate capacitor storing the electricity produced by proton +muon and providing a skin cover for the proton+muon.
New Physics started with Atom Totality of 1990, but accelerated by 2016-2017 when it is clearly seen that atoms and their subatomic particles are not "balls with no jobs, no function".
And this is so important to throw out Old Physics immediately, for Sun and Stars shine not from fusion but from Faraday law. This is why 25% of all insect biomass died from 2010 to 2020, because every year, the Sun gets hotter and hotter.
And unless humanity gets out there to Europa and places a permanent colony there in the next 1,000 years, that all the life on Earth including humanity will be scorched and fried to death-- all life on Earth goes extinct and into oblivion. The only
remains that once was human history, is the Voyagier spacecraft with that emblem insignia it carries that once upon a time-- there lived humans who built this spacecraft.
Old Science died in year 1990 with Atom Totality theory. Old Math had a funeral in year 2013. Old Physics had a funeral in year 2017 when its stupid and silly "tiny balls are neutrons, protons, electrons".
Let this be AP's 255th book of science.
AP, King of Science
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
8:02 PM (3 hours ago)
to
In the future, one can easily recognize a book in Old Physics or Old Math without ever looking up the date of publication. For if the authors use Reals as numbers-- the book is trash and outdated. If the authors of physics show a diagram sketch of the
Atom as balls and the proton and neutron as balls, then the book is outdated and useless.
If one does a survey of the professors in every physics department of colleges and universities across the globe with only one question in mind.
Survey: Professor, why do you believe when alpha particles shot into gold leaf in Rutherford-Geiger-Marsden Experiment of early 1900s, why do you believe a 180 degree richochet back to alpha gun source with a speed faster than the alpha particle entered
the gold foil, why do you believe that proves a "nucleus"?
Professor: Well, ahh, well, the alpha particle hit a big nucleus of 79 proton and 118 neutrons for a total of 197 nucleons.
Survey: Yes, but hitting a wall of 197 nucleons does not explain the increase of the alpha particle's speed. To explain that increase in speed, the alpha particle had to hit something in a head on collision something going in the opposite direction.
Professor: Ahh,,, yes of course,,, hit something moving in the opposite direction, ya, yes of course...
AP
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)