1
   

The Base of Physics, (a brief history of touchy and feely))

 
 
Jasper10
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 30 Dec, 2021 05:14 am
@Jasper10,
This magnetism theory is now the leading theory………and the gravity theory is now limping on far behind……..totally lost….

All evidence backs up the magnetism theory and not the gravity theory….

0 Replies
 
htam9876
 
  0  
Reply Thu 30 Dec, 2021 06:19 pm
The behavior of the J – 10 bully bully is just alike a boring rat, which shits everywhere and moves rubbish to your place.
Science is just science. Rat **** is just rat ****. 神经病 is just神经病.
Useful is useful, useless is useless.
Why science has to accept rat **** and神经病?
呵呵

J – 10 bully has receded to be a stumbling stone in the development of science. I am sure.
What he is doing just destroying the ecological environment of a2k community and plaguing science and society, damaging the reputation and future of a2k community. “A piece of rat **** destroys a pot of soup”. J-10 bully is obviously that piece of rat **** in a2k. I am sure.
What he can do in the rest of his time will be DREAMing (satisfy his mind with his psychology) and TROLLing others and waste others’ time and the resource of the Earth. I am very sure.
The most happy guys of course would be the First Order. 呵呵. I am sure enough.

J – 10 bully need not to find an absurd reason or excuse to defend his evil behavior of trolling / bully / attack / disturbance and fool others. Such game is too youth and useless. Denial of one’s criminal is non – sense too in society. Everything is under public review. Everybody has to be responsible for his behaviors.
htam9876
 
  0  
Reply Thu 30 Dec, 2021 06:26 pm
Next, go on with normal scientific research on most basic level.

Special analysis about the problem of “massless particle” 2, touchy and feely:

1. Such representation of “for a massless particle, its energy E = pc”. According to this “authentic” idea, the energy of “a massless particle” E does not equal to zero;
2. Energy – mass equation. According to this “authentic” idea, the energy of “a massless particle” E equals to zero.
There should be no contradiction in nature. If there is any, it must be the flaw in man’s theory. Actually such problem has been solved. The so called energy – momentum equation is just a tricky math game as illustrated above. So, such representation of “for a massless particle, its energy E = pc” is also a tricky math game. (For details, please see previous two posts.)

Moreover, there shouldn’t be two kinds of energy – mass relation in nature (for “a massless particle”). Actually such problem has been solved. The so called energy – momentum equation is just a tricky math game as illustrated above. So, such representation of “for a massless particle, its energy E = pc” is also a tricky math game. (For details, please see previous two posts. The consecutive of this thread has entirely been destroyed by J – 10 rat ****. It’s a tragedy in science.)


Liqiang Chen
陈力强
Dec 31, 2021
给他江门地方黑恶势力钟永康集团及新会一中九一四班谁谁一个超文革赛阎王光荣称号快快全世界全宇宙打靶啦。当今时代,全世界没有什么人能够值得如此殊荣。呵呵
0 Replies
 
htam9876
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Dec, 2021 06:28 pm
@izzythepush,
Thank you for your reminding, sir.
0 Replies
 
Jasper10
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 31 Dec, 2021 02:10 am
@htam9876,
For goodness sake htam9876…..if you want a real problem to solve then solve this one…

There is the possibility that the magnetic fields in all of the cosmos at both the macro/micro levels were in place before the Big Bang….Just step outside of your “pea sized” brain for a while and consider other possibilities……sorry you are as much an infuriating guy as you seem to think I am….

The question is how would they have got there?

You can’t get electromagnetic fields without an electrical input and yet the electrical input can’t happen until the electromagnetic fields are in place.

The magnetism theory claims that there are enormous amounts of toggling +/- charges happening in the cosmos (fluctuating energy) which would be required to produce electricity.

This +/- charge “toggling effect” is obvious and is observed by the pulses that are coming from “black holes” (which aren’t black holes by the way) …as just one example.….The supposed black holes are merely electromagnets.

Stop wasting your time and help to resolve real scientific issues….that is the reason I started talking with you in the first place….you seemed like an intelligent guy….obviously not.

Magnetism utilises all the 4 off logic output possibilities of -/-…-/+…+/-…+/+..…..you know that ……so why are you wasting your time trying to disprove it!!!
Jasper10
 
  0  
Reply Sat 1 Jan, 2022 02:14 am
@Jasper10,
The 4 off +/- magnetic charge combinations is strong proof that the gravity theory isn’t correct.Nature DOES unitise all four logic combinations…. -/-…-/+….+/-….+/+…as I have been saying all along and yet I am not taken seriously but rather just bullied and mocked..

I thought scientist were into facts/evidence/proof?……..there you have it…

Do you honestly think that nature is going to accommodate made up theories based upon biased half logic?

You can come up with as many manipulated calculations as you wish…..you are wasting your time….nature will just laugh and mock ..…philosophy as well….

Ask the question…does the gravity theory utilise full or half logic…if you believe it does utilise full logic then where is your hard evidence for that?

The magnetism theory has provided hard evidence and is waiting for the gravity theory to do the same….



Jasper10
 
  0  
Reply Sun 2 Jan, 2022 08:42 am
@Jasper10,
So the gravity theory cannot provide any hard evidence for full logic outputs identical to magnetism’s logic outputs ……why not?

The gravity theory doesn’t even recognise the leading part magnetism plays in the cosmos……why not?

If nature utilises full logic outputs DUE TO ELECTROMAGNETIC EFFECTS then why is modern day science producing theories based upon half logic outputs?……

Does modern day science think it is smarter than nature?…..lol….


Jasper10
 
  0  
Reply Mon 3 Jan, 2022 02:30 am
@Jasper10,
As it can’t be definitively confirmed which came first…. the electromagnetic fields that produce the “toggling” +/- charges (electricity) or the “toggling” +/- charges (electricity) that produce the electromagnetic fields, let’s assume they both came first………..if only for the sake of balanced science.

We can’t say neither came first because clearly the electromagnetic magnetic fields and the “toggling” effect is observed……..either one of them came first or they both came first.

There is the possibly of 2 systems feeding each other i.e. the 1st system inputting an electrical signal into the 2nd system thus producing the electromagnetic fields in the 2nd system that would be required to produce “toggling” +/- charges (electricity) for inputting back into the 1st system.

However,there is the obvious problem of where did the initial electrical signal originate from?

Ummm …all practical stuff though that could help explain what is happening in other science’s….

What input is the gravity theory offering the other sciences?….absolutely nothing …WHY IS THIS???

The magnetism theory has overtaken the gravity theory as the leading scientific theory.
Jasper10
 
  0  
Reply Tue 4 Jan, 2022 01:45 am
@Jasper10,
Remember folks modern day science will drop its GLUE theory like a stone should antigravity turn up…….that tells you how much confidence they have in their GLUE theory ….why therefore is modern day science packaging the GLUE theory up as fact?????……..when it’s only their latest GUESS,required to patch up their half logic science….that is isn’t science…science shouldn’t be based upon a GUESS.

Modern day science hasn’t a hope of finding a united theory with it’s half logic calculations that contradict what is observed in nature…..

The magnetism theory has overtaken the gravity theory….it already has its balancing components …i.e. + and - charges….
Jasper10
 
  0  
Reply Tue 4 Jan, 2022 03:44 am
@Jasper10,
+ and- charges that "TOGGLE"....
0 Replies
 
Jasper10
 
  0  
Reply Tue 4 Jan, 2022 03:45 am
@Jasper10,
Modern day science needs to think outside the box a bit more.......it's blinkered....
0 Replies
 
htam9876
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Jan, 2022 02:07 am
Non – relativistic (invariable) mass problem, touchy and feely:

If the non – relativistic mass is employed in SR, the so called energy – momentum equation is as blow:
E² = p²c² + (mc²)²
(note: piggy quotes it from some “authentic” guys’ posts in some professional physics sites.)

Then:
1. If the energy – momentum equation reflects the stationary situation, then, momentum p naturally equals to zero. Then, we got E² = 0 + (mc²)², namely: E² = m²c^4 = m² c² c².

2. If the energy – momentum equation reflects the dynamic situation, then, p = mv, so:
E² = p²c² + (mc²)² = m²v²c² + (mc²)² = m² (v² + c²) c².

Because in dynamic situation velocity v ≠ 0, then, (v² + c²) ≠ c²
That means the energy – mass relation is not the same in different inertial frames (or say, it changes following movement).

But one of the basic principles of SR is "physics rule is equivalent" in different inertial frames. It’s a problem.

Now in the new era of PRESENCE – PROPERTY, we can analyze it from another angle.
Piggy considers the energy – mass relation is the third fundamental natural relation, which is the affair of the PRESENCE – PROPERTY natural system.
Such fundamental natural relation is inherent property of matter and the most basic natural rule and should not change following movement. It’s the affair in the independent PRESENCE – PROPERTY natural system. It’s also a problem here.


If the relativistic mass is employed, then
1. If it is the stationary situation, E0 = m0c².
2. If it is the dynamic situation, E = mc².
(Relevant materials for reference: the chapter “Theory vs practice, touchy and feely” and the chapter “The energy – momentum equation vs the energy – mass equation, touchy and feely” ahead.)
That means the energy – mass relation is the same (namely c²) in different inertial frames (or say, it would not change following movement).
Problems solved.

Liqiang Chen
陈力强
Jan 5 , 2022
Now piggy doubts whether the pig head understands physics or not as the what coffin box from what CN said in PHF in 2020:
https://physicshelpforum.com/threads/the-game-of-match-sticks.16181/post-50090
In fact, shortly after piggy left PHF in 2020, a local guy stopped piggy on the street and insisted he had a physics question to ask me. Piggy just replied to that guy: “I know nothing about physics”. Bounce…
给他江门地方黑恶势力钟永康集团及新会一中九一四班谁谁一个超文革赛阎王光荣称号快快全世界全宇宙打靶啦。当今时代,全世界没有什么人能够值得如此殊荣。呵呵

0 Replies
 
htam9876
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Jan, 2022 01:51 am
Special analysis about the problem of “massless particle” 3, touchy and feely:
As illustrated in last chapter “non – relativistic (invariable) mass problem, touchy and feely”, when non – relativistic (invariable) mass is employed, the so called energy – momentum equation also can be transformed into the form of energy – mass relation:
1. If the energy – momentum equation reflects the stationary situation, E² = m² c² c².
2. If the energy – momentum equation reflects the dynamic situation, E² = m² (v² + c²) c².
If you consider a particle is “massless”, then, its energy will be zero. Such “massless - energyless” particle is theoretically meaningless in physics. It does not exist in nature.

Liqiang Chen
陈力强
Jan 10, 2022
Now piggy doubts whether the pig head understands physics or not as the what coffin box from what CN said in PHF in 2020:
https://physicshelpforum.com/threads/the-game-of-match-sticks.16181/post-50090
In fact, shortly after piggy left PHF in 2020, a local guy stopped piggy on the street and insisted he had a physics question to ask me. Piggy just replied to that guy: “I know nothing about physics”. Bounce…
给他江门地方黑恶势力钟永康集团及新会一中九一四班谁谁一个超文革赛阎王光荣称号快快全世界全宇宙打靶啦。当今时代,全世界没有什么人能够值得如此殊荣。呵呵
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
morals and ethics, how are they different? - Question by existential potential
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 01/24/2022 at 03:07:10