Walter Pegeto : I think you are only interested in cheap propaganda.
Obviously you are unskilled and not able to understand Mills approach and to discuss the shortcomings of his model.
When is settled settled?
-
-
"SM is almost a complete failure for describing dense mass and particle structure"
According to SM, electrons acquire mass by Higgs mechanism.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2013 was awarded jointly to François Englert and Peter W. Higgs "for the theoretical discovery of a mechanism that contributes to our understanding of the origin of mass of subatomic particles, and which recently was confirmed through the discovery of the predicted fundamental particle, by the ATLAS and CMS experiments at CERN's Large Hadron Collider".
-
"Obviously you are unskilled and not able to understand Mills approach and to discuss the shortcomings of his model."
True, I am too unskilled to discuss his model, however I am absolutely convinced that (almost) nobody in the scientific community takes seriously his theory.
-
" Turbulent flow does not have a flat velocity flow across the middle 3/5"
Whereas poor behavior seems to stick and be recycled forever!
The continual use of the terms fringe science and pseudoscience with regard to LENR is poor behaviour,
Especially when TTHnew often misconstrues what is written as conventional science in an egregious manner
As with
The neutron proton mass difference is significant to six significant figures
when Stephan Durr's research shows that it is only accurate to two significant figures.
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.o…632-1745062307.1563745632
-
I am absolutely convinced that (almost) nobody in the scientific community takes seriously his theory.
For some people here that is the strongest possible endorsement.
-
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2013 was awarded jointly to François Englert and Peter W. Higgs "for the theoretical discovery of a mechanism that contributes to our understanding of the origin of mass of subatomic particles, and which recently was confirmed through the discovery of the predicted fundamental particle, by the ATLAS and CMS experiments at CERN's Large Hadron Collider".
That's news for the tax-payers. The energy of the Higgs particle CERN found can be exactly calculated by NPP2.0 and is a simple proton resonance.... Higgs never predicted the mass of his particle. Something people like you never will understand.
-
The energy of the Higgs particle CERN found can be exactly calculated by NPP2.0 and is a simple proton resonance....
The Higgs boson is the excitation of the Higgs field. It has nothing to do with the proton as seen below.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_boson
It is worth noting that the Higgs field does not "create" mass out of nothing (which would violate the law of conservation of energy), nor is the Higgs field responsible for the mass of all particles. For example, approximately 99% of the mass of baryons (composite particles such as the proton and neutron), is due instead to quantum chromodynamic binding energy,
-
The Higgs boson is the excitation of the Higgs field. It has nothing to do with the proton as seen below.
Your a babbler Axil! As you believe the SM / CERN cheaters did know the Higgs mass in advance.
But tell the world why we can calculate the exact mass of the "fake Higgs" particle based on the well known proton relativistic mass?
-
Your a babbler Axil! As you believe the SM / CERN cheaters did know the Higgs mass in advance.
But tell the world why we can calculate the exact mass of the "fake Higgs" particle based on the well known proton relativistic mass?
Again one more try of this babbler.
I thought, he learned it. No. So sad. Anyway, Wyt, keep Your head up.
-
"That's news for the tax-payers. The energy of the Higgs particle CERN found can be exactly calculated by NPP2.0 and is a simple proton resonance.... Higgs never predicted the mass of his particle. Something people like you never will understand."
CERN is an international project officially supported, well financed and controlled by European Union.
https://cds.cern.ch/record/2652956/files/English.pdf
total budget
1171170100 CHF i.e. 1,192,321,432 $
-
Obviously you are unskilled and not able to understand Mills approach and to discuss the shortcomings of his model.
Wyttenbach I really don't understand what you are doing making comments like this on this site. Of course most of those you encounter here do not have the mathematical sophistication to comprehend either Mill's work or your own SO(4) stuff. So is not really noteworthy ... do you really have to shout it at people? In fact I will go further and speculate that there is no one here who has such sophistication. Can you point to someone who might be capable? If the answer is "no" then I ask what you are doing here at all.
Have you submitted your work to a peer-reviewed academic journal? You need to put your ideas in front of serious people and not the easy audience you encounter here. ResearchGate is not acceptable nor is a patent application. If you could publish in a good journal then your credibility would go up. Right now I see you about the same as Axil and if you are dissatisfied with this then I ask you ... how am I to distinguish between the two of you?
-
"Have you submitted your work to a peer-reviewed academic journal? You need to put your ideas in front of serious people and not the easy audience you encounter here. ResearchGate is not acceptable nor is a patent application. If you could publish in a good journal then your credibility would go up. Right now I see you about the same as Axil and if you are dissatisfied with this then I ask you ... how am I to distinguish between the two of you?"
That's exactly my point!
-
The Euphemism Treadmill starts here.
And come off it Huxley... Where else you gonna get your kicks?
-
That's exactly my point!
May be you should value your contributions before you qualify others...
In my index you are "a public relation troll" of SM adepts, that so far made no own contribution to the LENR world.
I'm happy to do patenting based on new knowledge, that help to explain LENR experiments....
-
Do you want me, out of tact, to use a non-standard use of the phrase "fringe science"? Pray, if not, tell me why it does not apply to LENR. I thought the whole point about LENR research is that it was not mainstream accepted which means funding, publication, etc are more difficult?
By definition everyone in a Mental Health Institution is crazy, but people generally refrain from walking into one and calling them crazy.
Say what you want though. You have reached the "too big to censor" category. -
That's exactly my point!
For the record, I made this same argument to Wyttenbach last Fall. I don't know if he has even tried to publish his SO(4) work in a serious way since. If he hasn't, and continues to refuse to even try, then it begins to look as though his efforts should be ignored.
-
For the record, I made this same argument to Wyttenbach last Fall. I don't know if he has even tried to publish his SO(4) work in a serious way since. If he hasn't, and continues to refuse to even try, then it begins to look as though his efforts should be ignored.
It has been published on Researchgate, Perhaps that is serious enough for him.
-
It has been published on Researchgate, Perhaps that is serious enough for him.
"Publishing" in ResearchGate does not fit the bill. It does not do what seeking publication in a mainstream journal would do ... place Wyttengate's claim of a rigorous theoretical framework for radically reforming modern physics in front of expert referees.
Your flippant attitude to this is a disappointment. It may be that you don't realize the importance of genuine peer review for this sort of thing.
-
then I will stop posting here for at least 12 months.
I will miss your input...
ah Yet another swan song..possibly
