"Vortex Based Mathematics by Marko Rodin"

Originally posted by LawrenceWippler

But about his book, even though I haven't read it, it has all the well-known hallmarks of pseudoscience.

It's not a peer reviewed publication and it claims to not only come up with a theory of everything, but to do so by setting aside the existing theories and laws of physics:

The Theory of Everything, Solved

Setting aside the presently known theories and laws of physics and attacking the problem from a different perspective

It's Lawrence J. Wippler's credibility you should be questioning when he sets aside presently known laws of physics. The best someone could do is to come up with an alternate explanation for them...we can't really "set them aside" as they are pretty well established by experimental evidence.

If you have any questions pertaining to this theory please ask, it's not pseudoscience,

Thank you. How do you demonstrate that an alpha particle possesses the properties of a magnetic monopole? In terms of magnetic monopole characteristics, what's different between the alpha particle and the He3 nucleus?

reply to post by LawrenceWippler


Thank you and welcome!

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
I just read that one page.

You obviously didn't comprehend the page, then, because you didn't even zero in on his hypothesis.

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by LawrenceWippler

But about his book, even though I haven't read it, it has all the well-known hallmarks of pseudoscience.

It's not a peer reviewed publication and it claims to not only come up with a theory of everything, but to do so by setting aside the existing theories and laws of physics:

The Theory of Everything, Solved

Setting aside the presently known theories and laws of physics and attacking the problem from a different perspective

It's Lawrence J. Wippler's credibility you should be questioning when he sets aside presently known laws of physics. The best someone could do is to come up with an alternate explanation for them...we can't really "set them aside" as they are pretty well established by experimental evidence.

If you have any questions pertaining to this theory please ask, it's not pseudoscience,

Thank you. How do you demonstrate that an alpha particle possesses the properties of a magnetic monopole? In terms of magnetic monopole characteristics, what's different between the alpha particle and the He3 nucleus?

The difference between the standard model and my theory is the underlying principal, the end results of all experiments remains the same. My theory uses only three particles and the law of attraction, and the standard model uses many elementary particles. Alpha and Beta particles (standard model) are actually short duration EM waves in the gamma region of the EM spectrum. The Alpha particle (standard model) is a wave composed only of north monopoles and Beta is composed of only south monopoles.

reply to post by LawrenceWippler


I noticed on your website that you link to overunity.com. Please tell us what you think about the feasibility of free energy technology devices.

Originally posted by LawrenceWippler

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by LawrenceWippler

But about his book, even though I haven't read it, it has all the well-known hallmarks of pseudoscience.

It's not a peer reviewed publication and it claims to not only come up with a theory of everything, but to do so by setting aside the existing theories and laws of physics:

The Theory of Everything, Solved

Setting aside the presently known theories and laws of physics and attacking the problem from a different perspective

It's Lawrence J. Wippler's credibility you should be questioning when he sets aside presently known laws of physics. The best someone could do is to come up with an alternate explanation for them...we can't really "set them aside" as they are pretty well established by experimental evidence.

If you have any questions pertaining to this theory please ask, it's not pseudoscience,

Thank you. How do you demonstrate that an alpha particle possesses the properties of a magnetic monopole? In terms of magnetic monopole characteristics, what's different between the alpha particle and the He3 nucleus?

The difference between the standard model and my theory is the underlying principal, the end results of all experiments remains the same. My theory uses only three particles and the law of attraction, and the standard model uses many elementary particles. Alpha and Beta particles (standard model) are actually short duration EM waves in the gamma region of the EM spectrum. The Alpha particle (standard model) is a wave composed only of north monopoles and Beta is composed of only south monopoles.

Are monopoles 3-d objects? what determines the difference between a south monopole and north monopole? do they have mass? how do they relate to the electron?

reply to post by ImaFungi


The electron has been posted about already:

Originally posted by Mary Rose

That is my hypothesis—that the proton and electron are really Dirac monopoles. The proton is actually a north magnetic monopole, and the electron is actually a south magnetic monopole. . . .

Originally posted by Mary Rose
reply to post by LawrenceWippler

 

I noticed on your website that you link to overunity.com. Please tell us what you think about the feasibility of free energy technology devices.

Most overunity devices require two forms of energy, gravity and magnetism are the most common, the output of these devices is very small. The people working on these devices think outside the box, they are the most innovative people in the world.

Originally posted by LawrenceWippler
The difference between the standard model and my theory is the underlying principal, the end results of all experiments remains the same. My theory uses only three particles and the law of attraction, and the standard model uses many elementary particles. Alpha and Beta particles (standard model) are actually short duration EM waves in the gamma region of the EM spectrum. The Alpha particle (standard model) is a wave composed only of north monopoles and Beta is composed of only south monopoles.

Sir, it appears that you summarily ignored the question that I asked. Let me try again:

Thank you. How do you demonstrate that an alpha particle possesses the properties of a magnetic monopole? In terms of magnetic monopole characteristics, what's different between the alpha particle and the He3 nucleus?

Since you mentioned the Beta particle, which in fact is an electron, I would like to extend my question to cover this: what do you have to say about the positron?

Your reference to alpha and beta as "short duration EM waves" is utterly confusing. In Standard Model, this is certainly not the case. If you are referring to your model, what is this assertion based on?

Originally posted by ImaFungi

Originally posted by LawrenceWippler

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by LawrenceWippler

But about his book, even though I haven't read it, it has all the well-known hallmarks of pseudoscience.

It's not a peer reviewed publication and it claims to not only come up with a theory of everything, but to do so by setting aside the existing theories and laws of physics:

The Theory of Everything, Solved

Setting aside the presently known theories and laws of physics and attacking the problem from a different perspective

It's Lawrence J. Wippler's credibility you should be questioning when he sets aside presently known laws of physics. The best someone could do is to come up with an alternate explanation for them...we can't really "set them aside" as they are pretty well established by experimental evidence.

If you have any questions pertaining to this theory please ask, it's not pseudoscience,

Thank you. How do you demonstrate that an alpha particle possesses the properties of a magnetic monopole? In terms of magnetic monopole characteristics, what's different between the alpha particle and the He3 nucleus?

The difference between the standard model and my theory is the underlying principal, the end results of all experiments remains the same. My theory uses only three particles and the law of attraction, and the standard model uses many elementary particles. Alpha and Beta particles (standard model) are actually short duration EM waves in the gamma region of the EM spectrum. The Alpha particle (standard model) is a wave composed only of north monopoles and Beta is composed of only south monopoles.

Are monopoles 3-d objects? what determines the difference between a south monopole and north monopole? do they have mass? how do they relate to the electron?

Are monopoles 3-d objects? Yes What determines the difference between a south monopole and north monopole? The law of attraction. Do they have mass? Yes
How do they relate to the electron? Electrons don't exist only n/s monopoles.

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by LawrenceWippler
The difference between the standard model and my theory is the underlying principal, the end results of all experiments remains the same. My theory uses only three particles and the law of attraction, and the standard model uses many elementary particles. Alpha and Beta particles (standard model) are actually short duration EM waves in the gamma region of the EM spectrum. The Alpha particle (standard model) is a wave composed only of north monopoles and Beta is composed of only south monopoles.

Sir, it appears that you summarily ignored the question that I asked. Let me try again:

Thank you. How do you demonstrate that an alpha particle possesses the properties of a magnetic monopole? In terms of magnetic monopole characteristics, what's different between the alpha particle and the He3 nucleus?

Since you mentioned the Beta particle, which in fact is an electron, I would like to extend my question to cover this: what do you have to say about the positron?

Your reference to alpha and beta as "short duration EM waves" is utterly confusing. In Standard Model, this is certainly not the case. If you are referring to your model, what is this assertion based on?

You must have a basic understanding of my theory in order to understand the answers to your questions.

This makes me think of "man" when it speaks on behalf of atoms.

"ENERGY"

theoryofeverythingsolved.com... In the core of every atom is a particle of matter, which represents one of the many elements from the periodic table. Each element has its own unique properties that differ from other elements, and no two elements are identical. The unique properties of each element are determined by the amount of magnetic lines of force that element is able to hold and the lines’ relative positions from the core of the element. These are what create the different frequencies of the electromagnetic spectrum, as well. This difference also affects how the elements react with each other and how atoms transform energy from one form to another.

This is what creates the different perceptions/personalities based on the core of each human being, hence their Aurora of each cell perhaps.

The difference in each affects how we interact with one another.

Couldn't help myself.

"The theory of everything" is beautiful.

Originally posted by LawrenceWippler
You must have a basic understanding of my theory in order to understand the answers to your questions.

I've looked at your book repeatedly and read some of the material there. Your emphasis is on simplicity, that was the whole point of developing your theory. What makes you think I don't have a basic understanding of your theory? Two times in a row, you decline to answer a fairly basic question pertaining to it, which is strange given its supposed simplicity. Right now, I'm not sure how to interpret such behavior. I'm still waiting for an answer.

Originally posted by LawrenceWippler

Originally posted by ImaFungi

Originally posted by LawrenceWippler

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by LawrenceWippler

But about his book, even though I haven't read it, it has all the well-known hallmarks of pseudoscience.

It's not a peer reviewed publication and it claims to not only come up with a theory of everything, but to do so by setting aside the existing theories and laws of physics:

The Theory of Everything, Solved

Setting aside the presently known theories and laws of physics and attacking the problem from a different perspective

It's Lawrence J. Wippler's credibility you should be questioning when he sets aside presently known laws of physics. The best someone could do is to come up with an alternate explanation for them...we can't really "set them aside" as they are pretty well established by experimental evidence.

If you have any questions pertaining to this theory please ask, it's not pseudoscience,

Thank you. How do you demonstrate that an alpha particle possesses the properties of a magnetic monopole? In terms of magnetic monopole characteristics, what's different between the alpha particle and the He3 nucleus?

The difference between the standard model and my theory is the underlying principal, the end results of all experiments remains the same. My theory uses only three particles and the law of attraction, and the standard model uses many elementary particles. Alpha and Beta particles (standard model) are actually short duration EM waves in the gamma region of the EM spectrum. The Alpha particle (standard model) is a wave composed only of north monopoles and Beta is composed of only south monopoles.

Are monopoles 3-d objects? what determines the difference between a south monopole and north monopole? do they have mass? how do they relate to the electron?

Are monopoles 3-d objects? Yes What determines the difference between a south monopole and north monopole? The law of attraction. Do they have mass? Yes
How do they relate to the electron? Electrons don't exist only n/s monopoles.

Ok, what is the law of attraction based on (is that related to charge?spin?intrinsic unexplainable quality?)

in a bar magnet, according to your theory, N and S poles are electrons "traveling? or exerting force" outside the magnet one way, and protons "traveling? or exerting force" the other way?

Originally posted by LawrenceWippler
Are monopoles 3-d objects? Yes

Interesting. If they are 3D objects, they must possess shapes. What shape is it? They would also have size. What's the size?

Oh and by the way, how do you describe the Omega Baryon in your model?

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by LawrenceWippler
You must have a basic understanding of my theory in order to understand the answers to your questions.

I've looked at your book repeatedly and read some of the material there. Your emphasis is on simplicity, that was the whole point of developing your theory. What makes you think I don't have a basic understanding of your theory? Two times in a row, you decline to answer a fairly basic question pertaining to it, which is strange given its supposed simplicity. Right now, I'm not sure how to interpret such behavior. I'm still waiting for an answer.

You continue to use particles from the standard model That don't exist, trying to answer a question using these particles is impossible. the standard model explanation is based on the wrong model of the atom. An example would be, how to separate a monopole? breaking a bar magnet in half is not the answer this would only make two smaller dipoles, to isolate a monopole you must use the law of attraction. move the north pole of a bar magnet passed a coil of wire and you will concentrate all of the south monopoles in that direction in doing so you will separate them south monopoles in one end and north monopoles in the other end this is what we call electricity recombine these monopoles and you get a magnetic field. You should read the entire book this would help you in understanding of my simple theory.

Originally posted by ImaFungi

Originally posted by LawrenceWippler

Originally posted by ImaFungi

Originally posted by LawrenceWippler

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by LawrenceWippler

But about his book, even though I haven't read it, it has all the well-known hallmarks of pseudoscience.

It's not a peer reviewed publication and it claims to not only come up with a theory of everything, but to do so by setting aside the existing theories and laws of physics:

The Theory of Everything, Solved

Setting aside the presently known theories and laws of physics and attacking the problem from a different perspective

It's Lawrence J. Wippler's credibility you should be questioning when he sets aside presently known laws of physics. The best someone could do is to come up with an alternate explanation for them...we can't really "set them aside" as they are pretty well established by experimental evidence.

If you have any questions pertaining to this theory please ask, it's not pseudoscience,

Thank you. How do you demonstrate that an alpha particle possesses the properties of a magnetic monopole? In terms of magnetic monopole characteristics, what's different between the alpha particle and the He3 nucleus?

The difference between the standard model and my theory is the underlying principal, the end results of all experiments remains the same. My theory uses only three particles and the law of attraction, and the standard model uses many elementary particles. Alpha and Beta particles (standard model) are actually short duration EM waves in the gamma region of the EM spectrum. The Alpha particle (standard model) is a wave composed only of north monopoles and Beta is composed of only south monopoles.

Are monopoles 3-d objects? what determines the difference between a south monopole and north monopole? do they have mass? how do they relate to the electron?

Are monopoles 3-d objects? Yes What determines the difference between a south monopole and north monopole? The law of attraction. Do they have mass? Yes
How do they relate to the electron? Electrons don't exist only n/s monopoles.

Ok, what is the law of attraction based on (is that related to charge?spin?intrinsic unexplainable quality?)

in a bar magnet, according to your theory, N and S poles are electrons "traveling? or exerting force" outside the magnet one way, and protons "traveling? or exerting force" the other way?

The law of attraction is based on magnetic charge.
The north pole of a bar magnet is a large concentration of north monopoles, and the south pole is a large concentration of south monopoles.

Originally posted by LawrenceWippler
You continue to use particles from the standard model That don't exist, trying to answer a question using these particles is impossible.

I think of the use of the LHC at CERN to name particle after particle as "smash and name." It's getting us nowhere.

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by LawrenceWippler
Are monopoles 3-d objects? Yes

Interesting. If they are 3D objects, they must possess shapes. What shape is it? They would also have size. What's the size?

Oh and by the way, how do you describe the Omega Baryon in your model?

edit on 10-2-2013 by buddhasystem because: (no reason given)

monopoles are spheres they are the smallest particle that exist, which cannot be measured.
The Omega Baryon (does not exist) you must understand how energy is transformed using my theory and you will see that only three particles exist.

reply to post by LawrenceWippler

the standard model explanation is based on the wrong model of the atom.

What is the correct model for the atom? After you answer that as clearly as possible, please explain how you know this. Can you demonstrate your model?