Image: CERN
This comes from an article at Symmetry.
What I want to show is that pictures like these show no evidence of gravity. The massive particles arc in all directions. If gravity was a force, then there would be more consistant arcing towards the earth.
This has been a known problem since QM and again found in the Standard Model. It shows the need for a Grand Unification Theory. This need for a unification shows there are errors of logic in gravity models.
Aaron
Posts
6 comments:
Assuming those particles are moving close to the speed of light, and recorded over a distance on the order of only meters, you're looking at time scale on the order of billionths of a second. Acceleration then is inversely proportional to the time squared, so we're in the region of quintillionths of a meter. Factor in an order of magnitude for the size of the region, and another for the size of the gravitational acceleration, and you're still in the neighborhood of quadrillionths of a meter.
And on top of that, you have enormous interaction forces of a high-velocity particle collision causing all manner of far-greater accelerations.
I honestly do not believe you can simply observe gravity with your naked eyes.
I agree with all the speeds and distances you describe. It really is not anything I can see with my eyes. This is a problem between models. This is why physists built new models.
Just looking at many of these pictures has led me to the idea that maybe it was gravity itself that was the problem. As I persued this idea I found these other models had the same issues I had with gravity. It is the tools and data that created the issue. The data refuted the theory.
You say "The data refuted the theory.", but you haven't posted data. You posted a picture of data. And you commented on the picture itself, not the data:
"What I want to show is that pictures like these show no evidence of gravity. The massive particles arc in all directions. If gravity was a force, then there would be more consistant [sic] arcing towards the earth."
Except such pictures are never going to show evidence of gravity. It's a false argument at best, and openly misleading at worst.
First. These pictures are the decay of baryons over time. These pictures show impact to decay. Even massive quarks (in the Standard Model) would feel the effect of gravity. Then there is the issue that there are tens of thousands of these pictures. I don't have them. But every time I see one I see assymetry, and a serious lack of gravity. The more of these pictures I see validates this issue for me.
The Scientists of the SM knew something was wonky when every event produce pictures that interacted with everything but gravity. In order for this error to be resolved a new boson needed to interact with mass. This Boson is located on the E/M scale. If this Boson works, then it is just a W Boson. When the new Boson decays it decays to a W and a p. Which is interesting because it is the electron that produces both the W and the p.
The problem with decay models is that they only show decay at high energy. They do nothing to show interactions in normal ranges. Then they tend to bend (spacetime) reality to meet the needs of the results.
You are right I am not a professional scientist. I am a simple disabled epileptic who can think.
I don't care if I am right. I can be wrong. But from the previous papers and posts. I show this model can support subatomic principles of information management to the atomic principles, then to larger structures.
Gravity is a failure to understand densities within a density medium.
A
> But every time I see one I see assymetry, and a serious lack of gravity. The more of these pictures I see validates this issue for me.
I guess that gets at the heart of my comment. You could look at a million of them and not "see" evidence of gravity. It's misleading to suggest that because there isn't uniform downward arcing in these pictures, that gravity is somehow in question.
> You are right I am not a professional scientist.
I don't recall saying that.
First thanks for reading my work.
You did not say that. I said it. And that is one of the historic crutches I have used to not work on these projects. I am sorry for bringing my emotions into this discussion. Sept 25th was an emotional response to small seizures. I should have not commented until I knew I was working and not feeling.
The interesting thing I find about the pics is that they do show events over time.
Thanks again
Aaron
Post a Comment