[Physics] Cubic Atomic Model + Theory

[Soretna]

Perhaps I should have gone a step further in my last hasty reply: if the
Michelson–Morley experiment was (and various other subsequent experiments
were) not null, then would that invalidate the SM and by extension quarks?


On Sun, May 3, 2020 at 12:15 PM Soretna <illumination00 at gmail.com> wrote:

> I disagree, we do not have any actual evidence of quarks or the validity
> of the SM whatsoever at this point.
>
>
> On Sun, May 3, 2020 at 7:25 AM Ilja Schmelzer <ilja.schmelzer at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> 2020-05-03 2:02 GMT+06:30, Soretna <illumination00 at gmail.com>:
>> > I recently stumbled upon a fresh new perspective by Franklin Hu (always
>> > love to find such unique perspectives) that I thought I should share for
>> > review and consideration:
>> > http://franklinhu.com/theory.html
>>
>> A rough look at this reveals:
>>
>> I see something about protons, electrons, and neutrons, but nothing
>> about quarks, three generations of them as well as of leptons.  So, it
>> looks like the SM as a whole is not covered.
>>
>> So, not worth to be considered.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Physics mailing list
>> Physics at tuks.nl
>> http://mail.tuks.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/physics
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.tuks.nl/pipermail/physics/attachments/20200503/8ea6b82a/attachment.html>