John Ross wrote:



I have not dealt with Mercury's orbit.

This is one of the most important experimental confirmations of general relativity. Were you even aware of it?

My theory can explain the double
slit results just as well as any other theory, better than most.

Quantitatively? Can you predict the exact probability distribution for the particle to hit different locations on the screen, in both the case where its path is measured and the one where it isn't?

 I have
not tried to calculate the muon magnetic moment.

The magnetic moment anomaly, not the magnetic moment. This is widely considered one of the most successful predictions in physics, experimentally verified to something like eight decimal places.

My theory does however
predict that a muon is nothing more than a high energy electron  that
has obtain its energy by capturing the entron of a high energy photon.

That's a non-quantitative "prediction", and I have no idea what experiment you're proposing to test it. Are there *any* quantitative predictions from either general relativity or quantum field theory (not ordinary nonrelativistic QM) that your theory can reproduce? I'm sure the answer is no, since few people who haven't done a graduate degree in physics have much detailed familiarity with these subjects (I don't), and your comment about GR earlier revealed a lack of familiarity with some pretty basic concepts, not to mention your attempt to overturn theories about neutrinos based only on eyeballing some pictures of particle tracks.

Again, please take this discussion elsewhere, it's off-topic on this list.

Jesse




-----Original Message-----
From: Jesse Mazer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 4:59 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; everything-list@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea


John Ross wrote:

>
>To the best of my knowledge and belief, my theory successfully predicts

>all known experimental knowledge of physics, chemistry and optics and
>does so better and simpler than any other theory.  I am working on a
>list of predictions of new things that can be proved experimentally.

Does your theory in its current form reproduce all these predictions
quantitatively, or just in terms of word-pictures? Have you made a
detailed
study of general relativity and the standard model of quantum physics to
see
if you understand all the main predictions made by these theories? Can
you
quantitatively reproduce GR's prediction of the precession of the
perihelion
of Mercury's orbit, for example (see
http://phyun5.ucr.edu/~wudka/Physics7/Notes_www/node98.html ) or the
extremely accurate prediction of the electron and muon magnetic moment
anomaly by quantum electrodynamics (see
http://latticeqcd.blogspot.com/2005/06/most-accurate-theory-we-have.html
)?
Can you predict more basic things like the interference pattern seen on
the
screen in the double-slit experiment, and how this pattern changes when
you
measure which slit the particle travels through?

Jesse



Reply via email to