Results from the LHC soon?

Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : Results from the LHC soon?
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 . . . 11 · Next

AuthorMessage
Profile tullio
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 8797
Credit: 2,930,782
RAC: 1
Italy
Message 1256518 - Posted: 6 Jul 2012, 17:46:41 UTC - in response to Message 1256489.  

Try here:
www.nature.com/scientificreports
Tullio
ID: 1256518 · Report as offensive
Profile Johnney Guinness
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 11 Sep 06
Posts: 3093
Credit: 2,652,287
RAC: 0
Ireland
Message 1256583 - Posted: 6 Jul 2012, 19:07:52 UTC - in response to Message 1256518.  
Last modified: 6 Jul 2012, 19:11:51 UTC

Try here:
www.nature.com/scientificreports
Tullio

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 · Report as offensive
Profile William Rothamel
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 3756
Credit: 1,999,735
RAC: 4
United States
Message 1256614 - Posted: 6 Jul 2012, 20:35:14 UTC

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 · Report as offensive
Profile tullio
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 8797
Credit: 2,930,782
RAC: 1
Italy
Message 1256800 - Posted: 7 Jul 2012, 4:52:02 UTC - in response to Message 1256699.  

Publish or perish is the motto of Academia.
Tullio
ID: 1256800 · Report as offensive
Profile Johnney Guinness
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 11 Sep 06
Posts: 3093
Credit: 2,652,287
RAC: 0
Ireland
Message 1256837 - Posted: 7 Jul 2012, 5:34:12 UTC - in response to Message 1256699.  
Last modified: 7 Jul 2012, 5:54:01 UTC

Sounds to me like Johnney Guinness needs to collaborate with someone
who is of equal Genius in the field of mathematics.

Einstein was famous for his thought experiments but collaborated with
others, who had greater mathematical skills, to help flesh out his theories.

Science Fiction is replete with innovative ideas and hypotheses that, without a
mathematical foundation, are just fodder for fantasy.

Johnney Guinness if you sit on this revolutionary insight too long someone else
will beat you to the Nobel Prize.

Cheers!

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 · Report as offensive
Profile tullio
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 8797
Credit: 2,930,782
RAC: 1
Italy
Message 1256899 - Posted: 7 Jul 2012, 7:29:08 UTC - in response to Message 1256846.  
Last modified: 7 Jul 2012, 7:36:01 UTC

Maybe you mean royalties. Science has loyalties.
Tullio
PS The search for the Higgs boson had nothing to to with gravitation. It was simply a verification of the Standard Model of elementary particles, which does NOT include gravitation.
ID: 1256899 · Report as offensive
Profile tullio
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 8797
Credit: 2,930,782
RAC: 1
Italy
Message 1256902 - Posted: 7 Jul 2012, 7:41:12 UTC - in response to Message 1256901.  

No.
i meant loyalties.
Science waits for no man.

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 · Report as offensive
Profile tullio
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 8797
Credit: 2,930,782
RAC: 1
Italy
Message 1256907 - Posted: 7 Jul 2012, 7:53:06 UTC - in response to Message 1256906.  

One qualifier.

Science can only have Loyalty to Truth.

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 · Report as offensive
Profile tullio
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 8797
Credit: 2,930,782
RAC: 1
Italy
Message 1256914 - Posted: 7 Jul 2012, 8:16:41 UTC - in response to Message 1256913.  

Tulio you're absolutely right there are no Truths.

Quantum Physics shows that Truth is limited only by the imagination of the observer.


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 · Report as offensive
Profile tullio
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 8797
Credit: 2,930,782
RAC: 1
Italy
Message 1256928 - Posted: 7 Jul 2012, 9:04:24 UTC

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.
Tullio
ID: 1256928 · Report as offensive
Profile Johnney Guinness
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 11 Sep 06
Posts: 3093
Credit: 2,652,287
RAC: 0
Ireland
Message 1257021 - Posted: 7 Jul 2012, 12:54:55 UTC - in response to Message 1256917.  
Last modified: 7 Jul 2012, 13:03:11 UTC


Gravitation is one of the four fundamental interactions of nature, along with electromagnetism, and the nuclear strong force and weak force. Modern physics describes gravitation using the general theory of relativity by Einstein, in which it is a consequence of the curvature of spacetime governing the motion of inertial objects. The simpler Newton's law of universal gravitation provides an accurate approximation for most physical situations.


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.


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 · Report as offensive
kittyman Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Jul 00
Posts: 51468
Credit: 1,018,363,574
RAC: 1,004
United States
Message 1257043 - Posted: 7 Jul 2012, 14:20:26 UTC - in response to Message 1257040.  

If I held a block of metal in my hand and then let go of it, it would fall to the ground.

Why?


Because my foot is there for it to fall on.....
From past experience, I know this to be true.
Ouch.
"Freedom is just Chaos, with better lighting." Alan Dean Foster

ID: 1257043 · Report as offensive
Profile tullio
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 8797
Credit: 2,930,782
RAC: 1
Italy
Message 1257076 - Posted: 7 Jul 2012, 15:32:36 UTC

Chris, gravity does not need an iron core. The gravitational attractions exists between any two masses, as demonstrated in the laboratory by Eotvos.Galileo threw some stones from the Leaning Tower of Pisa and demonstrated that they fall in equal time whatever their mass. This equivalence principle between inertial mass and gravitational mass is the basis of general relativity.
Tullio
ID: 1257076 · Report as offensive
Profile tullio
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 8797
Credit: 2,930,782
RAC: 1
Italy
Message 1257092 - Posted: 7 Jul 2012, 15:58:37 UTC - in response to Message 1257082.  
Last modified: 7 Jul 2012, 16:05:09 UTC

Okaaaaaay.

So define gravity then and why it happens .....


It is one of the 4 fundamental interactions, nuclear strong, electromagnetic, nuclear weak and gravitation. It is the weakest of the 4 but it is long range and determines the structure of the universe.Its field id a tensor field, that is its quantum would have mass 0 and spin 2 but has never been observed and probably never will. We (Einstein@home)and other people are trying to detect the gravitational equivalent of electromagnetic waves, which are generated by a vector field whose quantum, the photon, has mass zero and spin 1.But gravitational waves have not yet been observed, because they are very weak. Why these 4 interactions exist and why they have so different strengths I do not know and nobody knows. God only knows. The first 3 are all correlated in the Standard Model of elementary particle, the fourth is not.Anybody who succeeded in doing this, including Johnney, would receive a Nobel prize.
Tullio
ID: 1257092 · Report as offensive
kittyman Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Jul 00
Posts: 51468
Credit: 1,018,363,574
RAC: 1,004
United States
Message 1257095 - Posted: 7 Jul 2012, 16:02:23 UTC - in response to Message 1257082.  

Okaaaaaay.

So define gravity then and why it happens .....


Define it?

Pain, when my foot understands that the brick has hit it.........

Why?..
Because my foot was in the path of the brick.
"Freedom is just Chaos, with better lighting." Alan Dean Foster

ID: 1257095 · Report as offensive
Profile William Rothamel
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 3756
Credit: 1,999,735
RAC: 4
United States
Message 1257104 - Posted: 7 Jul 2012, 16:32:32 UTC
Last modified: 7 Jul 2012, 16:33:56 UTC

Gravity is defined by the General Theory of Einstein. A warpage of space caused by mass and the fact that any system seeks it's lowest state of energy. Quantum Loop Gravity is still undefined and may offer some unification toward the Grand Unified Theory.

The Higgs was related to how particles acquire mass. Mass and gravity are not the same thing
ID: 1257104 · Report as offensive
Profile Johnney Guinness
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 11 Sep 06
Posts: 3093
Credit: 2,652,287
RAC: 0
Ireland
Message 1257108 - Posted: 7 Jul 2012, 16:38:07 UTC
Last modified: 7 Jul 2012, 16:38:52 UTC

Here is a good question!

Does anyone here believe me when i say that i have the solution to the problem of unifying gravity with the rest of physics. I can understand anyone being generally skeptical because i have not provided the solution. But does anyone believe me? Or would you even have an open mind on the idea that i might have solved the problem?

John.
ID: 1257108 · Report as offensive
Profile tullio
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 8797
Credit: 2,930,782
RAC: 1
Italy
Message 1257109 - Posted: 7 Jul 2012, 16:39:16 UTC - in response to Message 1257104.  


The Higgs was related to how particles acquire mass. Mass and gravity are not the same thing

There are two masses, inertial mass and gravitational mass, which are equivalent according to Einstein. The Higgs theory refers to inertial mass, not to gravitational mass. This as far as I know.
Tullio
ID: 1257109 · Report as offensive
Profile tullio
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 8797
Credit: 2,930,782
RAC: 1
Italy
Message 1257111 - Posted: 7 Jul 2012, 16:43:14 UTC - in response to Message 1257108.  

I would believe you if you were Jesus Christ. Remember what He said to Apostle Thomas: you believe me because you have seen my nail holes. Blessed are those who believe me without having seen them. But you have no nail holes.
Tullio
ID: 1257111 · Report as offensive
Profile Johnney Guinness
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 11 Sep 06
Posts: 3093
Credit: 2,652,287
RAC: 0
Ireland
Message 1257115 - Posted: 7 Jul 2012, 17:03:26 UTC - in response to Message 1257111.  
Last modified: 7 Jul 2012, 17:07:30 UTC

I would believe you if you were Jesus Christ.

Tullio,
No, i'm not Jesus. But there a few months back, i wasn't sure. So i had to do a few checks just in case i was Jesus. So i made out a check-list to see if i passed any of the criteria that would make me Jesus.

1. Jesus was the Son of God - I failed, i have a normal standard human father. I look just like him.
2. Jesus led a good life - I failed this too. I have been a sinner from day one.
3. Jesus preformed miracles by healing people - I failed here too. I struggle to put band-aids on cuts. I can't heal anyone.

So i fail most of the criteria for being Jesus. Aw well, maybe next time.

Remember what He said to Apostle Thomas: you believe me because you have seen my nail holes. Blessed are those who believe me without having seen them. But you have no nail holes.
Tullio

Thats very appropriate Tullio,
Yes, i am asking people to believe me without showing you the scientific proofs first. But there is a difference here. I do have the scientific proofs. But as i said before, i'm just with-holding them for the moment to allow me time to try to benefit from my own discovery in some way. But i have also told you that i will show you the proofs at some stage. I just don't know yet when i can do that.

John.
ID: 1257115 · Report as offensive
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 . . . 11 · Next

Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : Results from the LHC soon?


 
©2024 University of California
 
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.