Results from the LHC soon?
Results from the LHC soon? |
|
| log in |
Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : Results from the LHC soon?
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 . . . 13 · Next
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
|
Nick, | |
ID: 1256379 ·  Reply
Quote
| |
|
Johnney, go to the CERN Bulletin site and you'll find an answer to your questions better than what I could do, I am still running MonteCarlo simulations of p-p collisions in Test4Theory@home. In its message boards a CERN theorist, Peter Skands, is available to explain what a Higgs boson is. | |
| ID: 1256382 · Reply
Quote
| |
|
What I am sure that Johnney meant to convey was, that in terms of his personal research, the average person has an average appreciation of what he thinks he may have found. | |
| ID: 1256397 · Reply
Quote
| |
|
Title; | |
| ID: 1256455 · Reply
Quote
| |
|
If you are so sure, publish your solution, don't keep us waiting. | |
| ID: 1256477 · Reply
Quote
| |
|
Yes, John; it didn't surprise me that you touched on the gravity aspect here. | |
| ID: 1256478 · Reply
Quote
| |
If you are so sure, publish your solution, don't keep us waiting. Tullio, I wish it was that simple. When i started doing gravitational physics research, i never thought i would actually solve the problem. I was just doing it for fun, to pass the time. But i did, i solved the problem, after several years of research, on my own. So i go to the trouble of finding out how to publish scientific results. And it turns out in the end that you need a doctorate or a professorship or something like that to publish in the appropriate journal. I didn't go to university. I learned what i learned on the internet and from reading lots of books. What i have is worth a lot of money. But only to the right people! Think about it like this - Just because you know how to build a Boeing 747, doesn't mean you have the money or the skills to build one! Its a bit like that. I have the answer to the problem, but i lack the skills to know what is the next step. So for the time being, i'm just sitting tight, trying to decide what to do with the information i have. Funny thing is, i have been sitting on the solution for about a year and a half now at this stage. And i still don't know what to do. I could just give it away for free by posting the information on the internet on a website. But i would Be kicking myself for the rest of my days on earth knowing that i never benefited in any way from solving one of the greatest problems in human history. People just steal information on the internet, they just copy information to their own website and say its their idea. So posting the solution on the internet is a last resort. I will only do this if i'm very desperate or if i know i'm dying or something like that. John. ____________    | |
| ID: 1256489 · Reply
Quote
| |
|
Try here: | |
| ID: 1256518 · Reply
Quote
| |
Try here: Thanks Tullio, Thats actually a very good possibility. I did read about the Nature reports website recently, its a good one. Its says; "What is the article-processing charge (APC)? The APC to publish in Scientific Reports is $1350 plus VAT where applicable" So Tullio for starters it would cost me $1350 plus VAT. Secondly, there is the peer-review process. These things scare me, they make me nervous. Its not that my science is wrong, because its not wrong! But I've never written a science paper for a journal and i might write it up wrong. And my way of explaining things is in plain English. I'm not very good at maths. In other words, here on this message board, i could explain in very plain English how gravity works, and you would understand it. But i really don't know if i could write out a load of mathematical formula's the way the academics might expect from a science paper. And $1350 is a lot of money. I can raise that money, but its still a risk. Then there is the peer-review. I fear the peer-review process, not because my science is wrong. I fear it because my science is simple. Its easy to understand but i fear rejection. If some physicist reads my paper, then rejects the paper because i don't have enough maths in the paper. Then the paper is rejected but the guy who read my paper will have the answer. He will have found the solution that i put several year of my life into. And he might not publish my work. But he could go off and tell all his physics professor friends and then they will end up publishing the solution in their names. So the truth is tullio, i'm scared of publishing. And i'm not sure that i want to just "give it away" by publicly publishing my results. I actually don't really know what i should do. So that is why i am just sitting tight until i decide what to do. John. ____________ | |
| ID: 1256583 · Reply
Quote
| |
So Tullio for starters it would cost me $1350 plus VAT. Secondly, there is the peer-review process. I just got a message from Purdue It comes from the learned doctor Zhu If theories replete, god-like and adaptive are your mete Then send me your papers for revue another limerick from Daddio | |
| ID: 1256614 · Reply
Quote
| |
|
Publish or perish is the motto of Academia. | |
| ID: 1256800 · Reply
Quote
| |
Sounds to me like Johnney Guinness needs to collaborate with someone guido.man, That is possibly the best advice anyone has ever given me on these forums. And i know its true. Someone could very easily beat me too it. It was Bob DeWoody that started this thread on the 28th of June. I never knew that CERN were going to make an announcement about the Higgs Boson. But in the period before the announcement, i was very scared that CERN had discovered what i discovered. I was watching this message here very closely for news. I thought CERN were possibly going to announce that they had finally cracked the Gravity problem. I was frightened that they had beaten me too it. Wow... I was so relieved when i watched the press conference from CERN and i heard them describe the Higgs Boson. I was so relieved that they still had not found the error that i found. When they described the Higgs Boson, i breathed a sigh of relief because i knew it was just another bloody particle they were describing. In other words, they still had not explained Gravity. So they still have not found the error. This buys me some time, but not for long. The truth is, if i could figure it out, then someone else could figure it out too. To be honest, when you know where the error is, the science is very simple and easy to understand. But the reason other scientists have not found it yet is that there is a stumbling block along the way that trips you up. When you go and carry out experiments or if you investigate the problem, there is a load of stumbling blocks that lead you astray. They are very difficult to get past, so you kinda need balls of steel and rock hard nerves just to fight your way past the obstacles that prevent you finding the answer. The science is not hard, its the obstacles along the way in the investigation that are hard to get past. What do i mean by Obstacles? Questions like "How could all the astronomers, and NASA, be wrong, and i'm right". Now astronomers and NASA have billions of dollars to spend on telescopes and rockets. How could they possibly be wrong? It would seem very unlikely. So its things like that make you quit your line of investigation. But i did not quit. I kept digging for answers in physics that just don't make sense. And yes, thousands of scientists CAN be wrong. Yes, this is possible! So the CERN announcement has bought me some time, this is good. There are other ways for me to progress forward. For one thing, i don't necessarily have to publish anything. Many "inventors" protect their inventions through the patent system. So if i put my theory into practise, i could build a machine that flies, but the machine would have no wings. Its would be the long sought after "anti gravity". Then i could patent the machine. Only problem is that its expensive to build prototype experimental aircraft and it takes years to get the exact engineering right. Sound like science fiction, doesn't it? Well not when you know how it works! Radio waves sound like science fiction, but not if you know how they work. Its a bit like that. And another thing. I have partly collaborated with another scientist, a physicist. But like you guys here, i have not told him the full story either, i'm kinda keeping him in the dark. But he is dam good with maths. Its another option. John. ____________ | |
| ID: 1256837 · Reply
Quote
| |
|
Maybe you mean royalties. Science has loyalties. | |
| ID: 1256899 · Reply
Quote
| |
No. Science is made by men, and men do have loyalties and other feelings, which sometimes guide their scientific outlook. Think only of Einstein and his refusal of quantum mechanics, which he had helped to start. God does not play dice. he said. Tullio ____________ | |
| ID: 1256902 · Reply
Quote
| |
One qualifier. Yes, but scientific truth varies, Think of Newton's theory of gravitation and of Einstein's general relativity and of a possible Theory of Everything including all four interactions. Which is truer? Every one was true in its time. Tullio ____________ | |
| ID: 1256907 · Reply
Quote
| |
Tulio you're absolutely right there are no Truths. Yes, the observer is important, and this brings man in the picture. I am a follower of Roger Penrose's ideas, expressed in his books, and I even had an exchange of letters with him. Very nice man. Tullio ____________ | |
| ID: 1256914 · Reply
Quote
| |
Gravitation, or gravity, is a natural phenomenon by which physical bodies attract with a force proportional to their masses. Gravitation is most familiar as the agent that gives weight to objects with mass and causes them to fall to the ground when dropped. Gravitation causes dispersed matter to coalesce, and coalesced matter to remain intact, thus accounting for the existence of the Earth, the Sun, and most of the macroscopic objects in the universe. I can't yet see a fundamental error in the above. Somebody did invent an anti gravity machine once with contra rotating gyroscopes but it wasn't very successful. | |
| ID: 1256917 · Reply
Quote
| |
|
Newton's theory is still used to plan spacecraft orbits and study celestial mechanics. Only a shift in the precession of Mercury's perihelion was explained by using general relativity, if I remember well. But the timings of the GPS satellites must take into account the effects of general relativity. | |
| ID: 1256928 · Reply
Quote
| |
Now Chris, I narrowed it down for you. You quoted 3 paragraphs, i assume you got them from Wikipedia page "Gravitation" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitation. In quoting you, i removed the first two paragraphs because they are 100% truth. But i left the bottom paragraph, which contains so many errors that i would have to re-write the whole paragraph. Now Chris i have stopped short of spitting out the billion dollar answer. I have stopped short of giving you the winning lottery ticket that will make you the most famous man on earth. If you have a half a brain in your head, and you have read most of my messages i posted in the last year and a half, you could easily solve the problem. This is what i won't do - I won't give you the solution! Under any circumstances! This is what i will do - For anyone that chooses to take up the challenge, if you even guess the correct solution, or if you get very close to the correct solution, i will PM you and tell you that you are correct! I give you my word. And i am an honest man. But to be honest, i seriously doubt that anyone here could even guess what the final outcome is going to be. But like i said, the end result is worth billions of dollars to any man who knows how to sell it! The end result means being able to construct aeroplanes that don't have any wings. In effect, we would be building our own UFO's. Now thats a big prize for anyone! John. ____________ | |
| ID: 1257021 · Reply
Quote
| |
|
If I held a block of metal in my hand and then let go of it, it would fall to the ground. | |
| ID: 1257040 · Reply
Quote
| |
Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : Results from the LHC soon?
| Copyright © 2013 University of California |
