[Physics] Cubic Atomic Model + Theory

Thu May 7 14:09:02 CEST 2020

Sorenta, I am with Ilja here. I have for many years been saying that Einstein's SRT is wrong. The mainstream scientists ( including one who worked at Cern, and whom I started a face to face discussion with, before he went back to Cern and continued our discussion by email), are at first convinced that they can show me the error of my ways, but when they discover that they cannot do that, quite simply because I am correct, the conversation just stops, or the emails stop coming.

I will give you two good examples. The particle accelerator at Cern is said to prove that nothing can travel faster than light. They have accelerated many particles with it, but can get none of them past light speed. The answer is simple. They are trying to accelerate something past light speed by using electro magnetism as the motive force. The accelerator producing this force is stationary WRT the laboratory and the ground et al, therefore cannot possibly push anything faster than light speed. As the particle is being pushed (or pulled, but I will stick with pushed) to a higher and higher speed, the force gets less and less, until at light speed there is no push at all. The analogy here is a hockey player, who hits the puck with enough force to accelerate it to 50 mph. This is because as he swings the hockey stick, the tip is moving at 50 mph. The player he has passed the puck to can only swing his stick at 50 mph, and as he swings his stick to help the puck along, he finds he cannot make it move any faster. This applies to all players in a line hitting the puck in the same direction, so it would appear that the puck has a maximum speed of 50 mph. Contrast that to a space rocket which carries its own engine (motive force). Put briefly, the rocket exhaust (motive force) is ejected at 3,000 meters per second, yet the rocket can achieve a velocity vastly in excess of that figure.  See http://problemswithrelativity.com/#lorentz paragraph four starting with "Imagine now a space rocket..."

I have posted that link on here previously, but got no reply. I wonder why.

Tom Hollings

> 
>     I must say that your reply has left me completely flabbergasted and in dismay Ilja. I don't understand how anyone could take that approach in life and at any stage of life. 😫
> 
>     I believe there are various options for coming to the truth personally for any researcher. One thing that became clear to me with a survey and study of these various and many experimenters is that there are tests that can be performed by people with smaller or even shoestring budgets to validate or invalidate the null or non-null results (depending on which side of the fence you are on) and ultimately come to the truth without relying on anyone else from any camp. I believe in being as being as free from bias and unshackled by preconceptions as possible (although I realize that as a human and with cultures the way they are it's never possible to completely succeed in this) and I have devised some of my own experiments based around this information and data that I think can provide further insight into the situation. 
> 
>     A sever problem always arises when we place our trust, somewhat blindly, into so-called research that appears now to have had scientifically impure motivations. I don't want to use the term evil as you did (perhaps even facetiously?), but I suppose it ultimately depends on your personal connotations of this word.
> 
>     Whenever there is clear evidence of such things it is, or should be, our personal and societal imperative to change things if we hope to leave the world in an improved state, even if it threatens our livelihood. 
> 
>     For some this presents a moral dilemma, perhaps akin to the professional clergyman that has realized that his faith is no longer correct and another option is, such as an unpaid lay ministry religion, and now must chose to reeducate themself and then place in jeopardy their ability to put food on the table for their family. I realize that this is all difficult, but it is an important crossroads that is personally revelatory and ultimately avails an opportunity to grow if one choses to go down this path of deciding to find the truth no matter the cost and insomuch that this pursuit is indeed guided by factual data and truth.
> 
>     The book is a small cost to pay and if the cost is too much for you, I would be willing to order and send you a copy if you decide otherwise. A keen mind that discovers truth after it has been hidden from them has an enormity of useful perspective and counsel to offer if not action to take that will evoke much good.
> 
> 
> 
>     On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 7:44 AM Ilja Schmelzer < ilja.schmelzer at gmail.com mailto:ilja.schmelzer at gmail.com > wrote:
> 
>         > > 2020-05-06 14:19 GMT+06:30, Soretna < illumination00 at gmail.com mailto:illumination00 at gmail.com >:
> >         > Ilja there are many, many non-null results with superior tooling all the
> >         > way up into this century / millennium. I think you would seriously
> >         > reconsider your thought process if you would review this expansive study of
> >         > history from back then until now.
> > 
> >         No, simply because I have made this bet from the start:  I will accept
> >         experimental and observational evidence as presented and accepted by
> >         the mainstream.
> > 
> >         Of course, with some probability this will be the wrong bet.  Such is
> >         life.  Anyway, as an outsider I have no chance to win in that playing
> >         field.
> > 
> >         And if these evil mainstream scientists conspire to suppress the
> >         results of true experiments, my chances are even lower, close to
> >         complete zero.
> > 
> >         _______________________________________________
> >         Physics mailing list
> >         Physics at tuks.nl mailto:Physics at tuks.nl
> >         http://mail.tuks.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/physics
> > 
> >     >     _______________________________________________
>     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/20200507/bc91e3c2/attachment.html>