On Mar 22, 8:07 pm, "Eric Gisse" <jowr...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Mar 22, 2:31 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote:

There is an unsolved yet enigma in physics:

we know experimentally that

Oh I can't WAIT to see how you ***** this up.

1
Galaxies are kept as a altogether conglomeration
of planets (masses) that are kept together
and not dispersed to the endless universe
by the force of gravitation

Porat is ignorant of the concept of "orbit". Neat.

2
Galaxies are getting further and further away from each other in a
growing rate that is until now
a sort of surprise

It hasn't been a surprise for years, Porat. Are you still living in
the 1920s?

ie
the rate of depression does not fit the existing
predictions by existing theories

Jesus, do you still think it is 1920?

It fits predictions by existing theories - FRW cosmologies for
example.

and surely it was not **predicted** by anyone of them
ie
a hole in the existing science that is patched'
by more and more theories and guesses that are nothing until now more
than guesses!!

It has been nearly 90 years - why don't you have a look at what has
been figured out in the intervening time since you last looked at
cosmology?

[snip remainder of babble about 'circlon']

All you "know" about it is that it moves in circles. Or straight
lines. Never been detected, no observed properties, nothing. Just
another idiotic concept pulled straight out of your *****.

------------
he disturbed Nazi ***** mother fucker Gisse

is in addition and ignorant fucker lier

betteer people than that disturbed idiot
know that the above problems are not solved!!

he is a walking damags to the advance of science
and a pathological bump parasite that
acomplished nothing new even not his Bsc
his only tallent is to be a nazi distrbed *****

please bypass the 22 years disturbedundergraduate *****
and please refere to my ideas
by
PHYSICS ARGUMENTS that are undoubtedly
unprecedented !!!

(unless some fuckers like Shase will bring
concrete evidence that i was precdented
many years ago
the little fucker thinks he can cheat
everyone forever !!
while nmo one gives a ***** on thatlittle disturbed bump parasite

so please no disturbed unsuppoted hand wavingst
of the menthaly sick boy .but physics arguments

Y.P
---------------------------

On Mar 26, 5:11 am, "PD" <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Mar 22, 5:31 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote:

There is an unsolved yet enigma in physics:

we know experimentally that

1
Galaxies are kept as a altogether conglomeration
of planets (masses) that are kept together
and not dispersed to the endless universe
by the force of gravitation

2
Galaxies are getting further and further away from each other in a
growing rate that is until now
a sort of surprise
ie
the rate of depression does not fit the existing
predictions by existing theories
and surely it was not **predicted** by anyone of them
ie
a hole in the existing science that is patched'
by more and more theories and guesses that are nothing until now more
than guesses!!

there is the black body material
there is 'the black body energy' etc
that makes sense but do not *unify* all the existing science to one
basic of understanding
and surely nothing of that guesses was found
experientally
so ??
the existing theories and guesses cannot be
explained satisfactory by a mediator that
moves naturally in straight lines!!

if it was in straight lines the rate of dispersion of galaxies could
be better explained
so
here comes my suggestion
(actually not a new one but some new explanations to it:)

the base to it is the new (for me old) guess or suggestion that

THERE IS ANUNKNOWN YET BASIC PARTICLE
I CALLED 'THE CIRCLON' THAT
MOVES NATURALLY IN **CURVED PATH!!
naturally means that it does it not because some
mysterious force but because 'it was born like that'
(a basic axiom)
now what are the advantages of that Axiom??

it explains better the difference between the
gravitational force **in 'short ranges""
compared to those gravitational forces
**in much longer ranges**!!

the main point is that short ranges
are not the same calculation as long ranges

the reason is a result of simple geometric
considerations!!

if the Circlon moves in circles it means
** that its
range of influence becomes much smaller
in larger distances !!!***

(the straight moving force agent moves to endless
distances
(indeed it becomes more deludes by distance
but it still **exists* even if it a long distance!!

while
the Circlon cannot move to endless distances
by the very fact that it moves in circular pathes!!
imho
the idea is simple !! (and i guess innovative!)

TIA
Y.Porat
-----------------------------

As I understand it, the Circlon was "invented" to try to explain to

----------------
first of all
thank you PD for your interest in my Circlon!

(you foergot to mention thatthe "circlon 'idea
is initiated by me Y.Porat
and our ancestors from a few thousands years a go said (in free clumsy
translation:
'anyone who gives credit to one who is
'copyrighted' something--BRINGS SALAVTION TO THE WORLD!!
please think of it and how cleaver and deep it is .....

2
i am not sure you folowed my idea deeply
though unlike the little crook here
which there is no ned to mension his name-
you spent some time thinking about it:

1
you still didnt ask a quation that i will do for you :
if i say that that it is the circlons that hit from behind- do the job
of attraction
than
*waht about those that strike on the front shotest line between acting
and acted particles '???
my answer is
since they move one agains the other
**they diverst and cancel each other!!
btw
that is just another reason why it
cant be mediators that move in straight lines
!!!!!!!!!!!
it cant ne ones that move in straight lines for othjer many reasons
but for
thinking people!!! (not parrots !!
since you satted toget intersted i take you out of my parrots lists
(:-)
i dont waht to get in it why there are many reasons against the
straight line mediators
i can just hint because i did it in past many timjes in more detailes
thje forst hint is conservation of momentum
if you get into it you find out that
the straight line explanation leads to to and endless line of
questions with a dead end

2
yes indeed i never made any qauntitative calculation untill now
onme of the reasons is that untill now
i succeeded to 'sel ' my abstarxct idea
onlt to a few cleaver people
sothere is no oint in investing in calculations before there is a
principal understanding of it

and if you know history of scince
great ideas started forst of all as just ideas
gemerally having a chnce to break through
only if otherpeople had no better choice!!..
ie because of some desoeration of the dead end situation
and i say that the existing situation proves itself again and again
and being unable for
making some new advance

the behaviour of Galaxies is a good example for that situation
you see
even a yound student that claimes he nows physics
didnt know that the behaviour of galaxies
as for now is actually **unsolved**
there are aguesses *fiddlings of theories to fit
every day to the new experiemntal data
no tto mension that that behaviour was
*never predicted' by all the pompous QM theory
in fact it could not explain it
so dark matter had to be intoduces as a guess
and dark enery as well
while no one ever found experimentall
dark matter or energy
the clever tricky guys founfd a patent for every thing:
they say it cannot by definition to be detected
and by that closing the mouths of all opposers
(clever but nasty ...)
the similar thing with say 'Gluons'
and soup of matrerial or waht ever)
instead of saying decently
we ahve no idea how it works

now
i have no objection to dark matter
it has mass remember (:-)
it explains the missing gravity
ok let it be and it mzkes sense
but in reality no other property of it is
predicted that speak only about mass
(of the 'smartest ones ' about energy
9without mass (:-)...
yet still mothing more
so
can you immagine a physicasn entity that has only one pro[erty ie
mass ????
waht about all the other properties ????!!!
non nada !
and no one is blinking an eye !!
now
i can aept darkkatter
yet my suggestion is that
**this dark matted is moving naturally
in closed circles or paths
or part of a circle if disturbed on its way !!
so it fits nicley my Circlon'
and might even improve the idea

3
yopu sak
can the circlon explalin the inverse low
of force
i say yes!!

if you take thepath of the circlon
as a force line and the number of force lines is not been born except
by the acting particles
and cannot be born inits way
than
a strigth moving mediatir is not very diffwerent from a circular
moving dediator
as the acted aprticle is further away
less force lines can be hitting it
and i would say that as the distance
becomes bigger the decrece is more
obvious than inj the case of stright lines
mediator

does it fit the galaxy data that while galaxies depert more and more
there si less and less force of gravitation
LESS THAN EXPECTED UNTILL NOW !!
to keep them back ???!!!
because the range of the circlon is smaller
by efinition of its circular movement !!
(a aprticle that moves in a circle will move
less furthwer away compaired to one that
moved in stright lines
is it not obvious ??
and the circlon excpalns very simple why all those mesengers that make
the attraction
**ans miss the target**(and why should not be those that miss the
target!!
so why are those mesengres are not
**lost for ever in the endless univesse and
**be depleeted in billions of years to zero ??!!!*

imho whithot that circlon our univesse
woud not last in one peice for so long
imho the Circlon explaines it better

and i could go one with it
but it is good enough for one post
sorry the spelling i am tired ... (:-)

TIA
Y.Porat
-----------------------

someone's satifaction how particles that mediate an interaction can
result in an attractive force. To some, an intermediary particle that
is exchanged between two other particles can only cause a repulsion,
like a rubber ball thrown from one player to another player. And so,
to some, the phenomenon of attraction is unexplainable by an
intermediary. In this model, attraction occurs because of being struck
from behind by the particle that travels a circular route, the
Circlon.

However, as well intentioned as this humble proposal may be, note that
it is at best qualitative, and there is not a single calculation that
has been performed that indicates how many more circlons should hit an
object from behind compared with from in front, why the strength of
the interaction should fall like the distance squared, nor in fact any
quantitative information whatsoever.

Furthermore, note that the "straight-line-moving intermediary" is NOT
the model of quantum field theories like QED and QCD, which do in fact
quantitatively predict attractions. Thus the conceptual barrier is not
necessary, and is just due to a lack of detailed understanding of how
these theories work.

PD- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -