RE: Neutrino shield idea

2005-10-11 Thread John Ross
My understanding is that the experimental evidence of Mercury's orbit
preceded Einstein's general theory.  There nothing wrong with
qualitative explanations, especially if they turn  out to be correct.
Copernicus' predictions were qualitative.  Who knows my theory might
match the experimental data to 10 places.  

-Original Message-
From: Jesse Mazer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 5:45 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; everything-list@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea


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.htm
l
)?
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




RE: Neutrino shield idea

2005-10-11 Thread Jesse Mazer

John Ross wrote:



Another solution is for you to ignore my comments, or maybe me yours.


This isn't just about me personally not being interested in your posts, it's 
about the discussion of your alternative physics ideas being *off-topic* 
on this list, just as much so if you came here and started a discussion 
about politics or your favorite TV shows.


But if the rest of the list members disagree with me I'll go with whatever 
the consensus is...how about a poll, who here thinks that the discussion of 
John Ross' theory is off-topic here, and who thinks it's on-topic? 
(regardless of whether or not you personally find John Ross' ideas to be of 
interest)


Jesse




RE: Neutrino shield idea

2005-10-11 Thread Ben Goertzel

The discussion of John Ross's theory is off-topic.

However, I would be happy about it anyway, IF I thought it was a good
theory, which I do not.

But I don't feel like taking the time to argue about why i don't think it's
a good theory, so I will continue to ignore the thread.

-- Ben Goertzel

 -Original Message-
 From: Jesse Mazer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 1:56 PM
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; everything-list@eskimo.com
 Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea


 John Ross wrote:

 
 Another solution is for you to ignore my comments, or maybe me yours.

 This isn't just about me personally not being interested in your
 posts, it's
 about the discussion of your alternative physics ideas being
 *off-topic*
 on this list, just as much so if you came here and started a discussion
 about politics or your favorite TV shows.

 But if the rest of the list members disagree with me I'll go with
 whatever
 the consensus is...how about a poll, who here thinks that the
 discussion of
 John Ross' theory is off-topic here, and who thinks it's on-topic?
 (regardless of whether or not you personally find John Ross'
 ideas to be of
 interest)

 Jesse







Re: Neutrino shield idea

2005-10-11 Thread daddycaylor
I am entertained by the discussion with John Ross, and can think of 
more entertaining questions for him (such as how about travelling by 
firing a neutrino gun at objects that you want to travel to?  sorry I 
couldn't help it), but I believe it is off topic.


Tom Caylor

-Original Message-
From: Jesse Mazer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; everything-list@eskimo.com
Sent: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 13:55:43 -0400
Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea

John Ross wrote: 
 

 
Another solution is for you to ignore my comments, or maybe me yours. 

 
This isn't just about me personally not being interested in your posts, 
it's about the discussion of your alternative physics ideas being 
*off-topic* on this list, just as much so if you came here and started 
a discussion about politics or your favorite TV shows. 

 
But if the rest of the list members disagree with me I'll go with 
whatever the consensus is...how about a poll, who here thinks that the 
discussion of John Ross' theory is off-topic here, and who thinks it's 
on-topic? (regardless of whether or not you personally find John Ross' 
ideas to be of interest) 

 
Jesse 
 





Re: Neutrino shield idea

2005-10-11 Thread Jesse Mazer

Tom Caylor wrote:


I am entertained by the discussion with John Ross, and can think of more 
entertaining questions for him (such as how about travelling by firing a 
neutrino gun at objects that you want to travel to?  sorry I couldn't help 
it), but I believe it is off topic.


For those who agree it's off-topic but might like to continue the discussion 
elsewhere (and I might want to do this myself), any suggestions about a good 
place to do that? I'm thinking the usenet group sci.physics might be a good 
option, since you don't have to register, there aren't any moderators, and 
that group already has plenty of threads about alternative physics ideas. 
Or maybe John Ross could set up his own discussion list on yahoo or MSN or 
something, exclusively for talking about his ideas.


Jesse




RE: Neutrino shield idea

2005-10-10 Thread John Ross
Right on Russell!  Has anyone ever measured the spin of a neutrino?
Let's get back to basics?  Let's consider the following which I assume
you fellows believe are true:

* Neutrino travel at the speed of light.
* Only photons travel at the speed of light.  (Except my tronnies that
usually go faster than the speed of light.)
* Neutrinos easily pass through matter although occasionally some are
stopped, gamma rays (the closest things to neutrinos according to the
Ross Model) pass through matter although some are stopped.  Gamma ray
energies are in the range of 1 mev, neutrino energies are in the  range
of 300 mev.
* Our sun produces a lot of neutrinos.  Neutrino flux decreases as
inverse square of distance as does gravity.
* No other theory provides a good explanation of the force of gravity.
(I don't call mass curving space as a good explanation.)
* Does anyone have a good explanation why the electromagnetic chart
should stop at about 4 or 5 mev? 

-Original Message-
From: Russell Standish [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 5:39 PM
To: Stephen Paul King
Cc: everything-list@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea


On Fri, Oct 07, 2005 at 09:02:17PM -0400, Stephen Paul King wrote:
 Dear Russell,
 
I hope you meant to write that photons are bosons with spin1. 
 Otherwise

Yes, you are right. Mea culpa! Put it down to the couple of decades
since I studied this stuff...

 we would have a hard time explaining Maxwell's Field equations. ;-) 
 About
 the differences between neutrinos and photons, we could also point out
that 
 photons have a null extension in the time direction and neutrinos,
having a 
 small but non-zero mass have an extension in the time direction - I am

 thinking here in terms of how we would embed our particles in a
Minkowski 
 or equivalent space-time diagrams.
 

Indeed - I thought about raising this difference also. Neutrinos are now
accepted as having nonzero mass, although that wasn't the case when I
was studying physics. Also, this guy would probably come back with
photons having nonzero rest mass! After all, he reckons Einstein goofed,
and that relativity is a load of old cobblers, so having nonzero
restmass particles traveling at the speed of light wouldn't be a problem
for him!

 Kindest regards,
 
 Stephen
 
 - Original Message -
 From: Russell Standish [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Cc: 'Stephen Paul King' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 
 everything-list@eskimo.com
 Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 6:12 PM
 Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea
 
 
 Neutrinos are fermions with spin 1/2. Photons are bosons with spin 0. 
 This is about as chalk and cheese as you can get. The difference is 
 not energy.

-- 
*PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which
is of type application/pgp-signature. Don't worry, it is not a virus.
It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this email
came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you may safely
ignore this attachment.



A/Prof Russell Standish  Phone 8308 3119 (mobile)
Mathematics0425 253119 ()
UNSW SYDNEY 2052 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Australia
http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks
International prefix  +612, Interstate prefix 02





RE: Neutrino shield idea

2005-10-10 Thread John Ross
I think the beta decay model is wrong where it predicts neutrinos are
basically different from photons.  I understand neutrinos travel at the
speed of light.  Only photons travel at the speed of light.

-Original Message-
From: Saibal Mitra [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 4:30 PM
To: John Ross; everything-list@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea


This means that beta decay proves your model wrong.

- Original Message - 
From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Stephen Paul King' [EMAIL PROTECTED];
everything-list@eskimo.com
Sent: Saturday, October 08, 2005 12:35 AM
Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea


 Thanks for the paper relating to detection of low energy neutrinos. 
 However, according to my model, neutrinos are very, very high energy 
 photons (off everybody's chart, except mine).

 Therefore, if my model is correct, then low energy neutrinos would 
 merely be the photons we are familiar with and would be very easy to 
 detect.

 -Original Message-
 From: Stephen Paul King [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 12:54 PM
 To: everything-list@eskimo.com
 Subject: Neutrino shield idea


 Howdy!

 I friend of mine has worked on a related idea that might help this

 inverstigation. Please see:

 http://davidwoolsey.com/physics/ideas/neutrinoscope/index.html

 Kindest regards,

 Stephen

 - Original Message -
 From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Cc: everything-list@eskimo.com
 Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 11:57 AM
 Subject: RE: ROSS MODEL OF THE UNIVERSE - The Simplest Yet Theory of
 Everything


  Yes.  But building a neutrino shield would be difficult.




RE: Neutrino shield idea

2005-10-10 Thread John Ross
Where is the proof that a neutrino is not a photon.  I believe people
are only guessing that a neutrino is a tardyon, whatever in the hell a
tardyon is.  Tardyons are not in my dictionary.

-Original Message-
From: Hal Ruhl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 2:50 PM
To: everything-list@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea


As I understand it a photon is a luxon as is a gluon and a neutrino 
is a tardyon.

Hal Ruhl


At 04:49 PM 10/10/2005, you wrote:
I think the beta decay model is wrong where it predicts neutrinos are 
basically different from photons.  I understand neutrinos travel at the

speed of light.  Only photons travel at the speed of light.

-Original Message-
From: Saibal Mitra [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 4:30 PM
To: John Ross; everything-list@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea


This means that beta decay proves your model wrong.

- Original Message -
From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Stephen Paul King' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 
everything-list@eskimo.com
Sent: Saturday, October 08, 2005 12:35 AM
Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea


  Thanks for the paper relating to detection of low energy 
  neutrinos. However, according to my model, neutrinos are very, very 
  high energy photons (off everybody's chart, except mine).
 
  Therefore, if my model is correct, then low energy neutrinos would 
  merely be the photons we are familiar with and would be very easy to

  detect.
 
  -Original Message-
  From: Stephen Paul King [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 12:54 PM
  To: everything-list@eskimo.com
  Subject: Neutrino shield idea
 
 
  Howdy!
 
  I friend of mine has worked on a related idea that might help 
  this

  inverstigation. Please see:
 
  http://davidwoolsey.com/physics/ideas/neutrinoscope/index.html
 
  Kindest regards,
 
  Stephen
 
  - Original Message -
  From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Cc: everything-list@eskimo.com
  Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 11:57 AM
  Subject: RE: ROSS MODEL OF THE UNIVERSE - The Simplest Yet Theory of

  Everything
 
 
   Yes.  But building a neutrino shield would be difficult.
 



RE: Neutrino shield idea

2005-10-10 Thread Hal Ruhl

Try http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luxon

At 06:06 PM 10/10/2005, you wrote:

Where is the proof that a neutrino is not a photon.  I believe people
are only guessing that a neutrino is a tardyon, whatever in the hell a
tardyon is.  Tardyons are not in my dictionary.

-Original Message-
From: Hal Ruhl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 2:50 PM
To: everything-list@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea


As I understand it a photon is a luxon as is a gluon and a neutrino
is a tardyon.

Hal Ruhl


At 04:49 PM 10/10/2005, you wrote:
I think the beta decay model is wrong where it predicts neutrinos are
basically different from photons.  I understand neutrinos travel at the

speed of light.  Only photons travel at the speed of light.

-Original Message-
From: Saibal Mitra [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 4:30 PM
To: John Ross; everything-list@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea


This means that beta decay proves your model wrong.

- Original Message -
From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Stephen Paul King' [EMAIL PROTECTED];
everything-list@eskimo.com
Sent: Saturday, October 08, 2005 12:35 AM
Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea


  Thanks for the paper relating to detection of low energy
  neutrinos. However, according to my model, neutrinos are very, very
  high energy photons (off everybody's chart, except mine).
 
  Therefore, if my model is correct, then low energy neutrinos would
  merely be the photons we are familiar with and would be very easy to

  detect.
 
  -Original Message-
  From: Stephen Paul King [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 12:54 PM
  To: everything-list@eskimo.com
  Subject: Neutrino shield idea
 
 
  Howdy!
 
  I friend of mine has worked on a related idea that might help
  this

  inverstigation. Please see:
 
  http://davidwoolsey.com/physics/ideas/neutrinoscope/index.html
 
  Kindest regards,
 
  Stephen
 
  - Original Message -
  From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Cc: everything-list@eskimo.com
  Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 11:57 AM
  Subject: RE: ROSS MODEL OF THE UNIVERSE - The Simplest Yet Theory of

  Everything
 
 
   Yes.  But building a neutrino shield would be difficult.
 





Re: Neutrino shield idea

2005-10-10 Thread Saibal Mitra
There are a lot of experiments that have detected neutrinos and verified
their properties (which are completely different from photons).



- Original Message - 
From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Saibal Mitra' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; everything-list@eskimo.com
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 10:49 PM
Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea


 I think the beta decay model is wrong where it predicts neutrinos are
 basically different from photons.  I understand neutrinos travel at the
 speed of light.  Only photons travel at the speed of light.

 -Original Message-
 From: Saibal Mitra [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 4:30 PM
 To: John Ross; everything-list@eskimo.com
 Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea


 This means that beta decay proves your model wrong.

 - Original Message - 
 From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: 'Stephen Paul King' [EMAIL PROTECTED];
 everything-list@eskimo.com
 Sent: Saturday, October 08, 2005 12:35 AM
 Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea


  Thanks for the paper relating to detection of low energy neutrinos.
  However, according to my model, neutrinos are very, very high energy
  photons (off everybody's chart, except mine).
 
  Therefore, if my model is correct, then low energy neutrinos would
  merely be the photons we are familiar with and would be very easy to
  detect.
 
  -Original Message-
  From: Stephen Paul King [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 12:54 PM
  To: everything-list@eskimo.com
  Subject: Neutrino shield idea
 
 
  Howdy!
 
  I friend of mine has worked on a related idea that might help this

  inverstigation. Please see:
 
  http://davidwoolsey.com/physics/ideas/neutrinoscope/index.html
 
  Kindest regards,
 
  Stephen
 
  - Original Message -
  From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Cc: everything-list@eskimo.com
  Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 11:57 AM
  Subject: RE: ROSS MODEL OF THE UNIVERSE - The Simplest Yet Theory of
  Everything
 
 
   Yes.  But building a neutrino shield would be difficult.
 




Re: Neutrino shield idea

2005-10-10 Thread Russell Standish
On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 09:11:04AM -0700, John Ross wrote:
 * Only photons travel at the speed of light.  (Except my tronnies that
 usually go faster than the speed of light.)

Who says? Any massless particle will travel at the speed of light.

-- 
*PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which
is of type application/pgp-signature. Don't worry, it is not a
virus. It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this
email came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you
may safely ignore this attachment.


A/Prof Russell Standish  Phone 8308 3119 (mobile)
Mathematics0425 253119 ()
UNSW SYDNEY 2052 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Australiahttp://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks
International prefix  +612, Interstate prefix 02



pgpoI2FMUm9xR.pgp
Description: PGP signature


RE: Neutrino shield idea

2005-10-10 Thread John Ross
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.

-Original Message-
From: Jesse Mazer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 3:21 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; everything-list@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea


John Ross:


Thanks for the response.

Yes my theory involves a lot of math.  Have you read my patent 
application? For example, I have a quantitative description of Coulomb 
forces acting inside photons.  These integrated forces represent the 
photon's energy.

Do these equations allow you to predict quantitative results of
experiments 
that have already been done, or are you just using math to describe new 
phenomena (like 'Coulomb forces acting inside photons') that have no
current 
experimental correlate? For your theory to be taken seriously, you have
to 
be able to reproduce successful predictions made by earlier theories 
(ideally, all the successful predictions made by the standard model of 
quantum physics, and by general relativity in the domain of gravity),
and 
also make predictions about new phenomena which can be tested 
experimentally.


Somehow I lost your pushing gravity thought and your reference to 
Feynman.  Could you re-send me the e-mail that included those thoughts.

There's an archived copy at 
http://www.mail-archive.com/everything-list%40eskimo.com/msg08025.html
--the 
message includes a link to a wikipedia article which has a list of 
critisisms of push gravity, as well as that long quote by Feynman I 
provided.

Anyway, as Russell Standish said to you earlier in the message at 
http://www.mail-archive.com/everything-list%40eskimo.com/msg08016.html ,

this list is not really for discussing alternative physics theories, the

theory of everything title refers not to a unified theory of physics
but 
to the idea that all possible universes (or all possible conscious 
experiences, maybe) exist, and some hope to derive an explanation for
why we 
see the laws of physics that we do from this sort of assumption. See Max

Tegmark's multiverse page at 
http://space.mit.edu/home/tegmark/multiverse.html for more background.
You 
might want to try submitting your ideas to the independent research 
subforum of physicsforums.com, located at 
http://www.physicsforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=146 , there are a lot of

knowledgeable people there.

Jesse



RE: Neutrino shield idea

2005-10-10 Thread John Ross
Name one.

-Original Message-
From: Saibal Mitra [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 3:27 PM
To: John Ross; everything-list@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea


There are a lot of experiments that have detected neutrinos and verified
their properties (which are completely different from photons).



- Original Message - 
From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Saibal Mitra' [EMAIL PROTECTED];
everything-list@eskimo.com
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 10:49 PM
Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea


 I think the beta decay model is wrong where it predicts neutrinos are 
 basically different from photons.  I understand neutrinos travel at 
 the speed of light.  Only photons travel at the speed of light.

 -Original Message-
 From: Saibal Mitra [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 4:30 PM
 To: John Ross; everything-list@eskimo.com
 Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea


 This means that beta decay proves your model wrong.

 - Original Message -
 From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: 'Stephen Paul King' [EMAIL PROTECTED];
 everything-list@eskimo.com
 Sent: Saturday, October 08, 2005 12:35 AM
 Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea


  Thanks for the paper relating to detection of low energy 
  neutrinos. However, according to my model, neutrinos are very, very 
  high energy photons (off everybody's chart, except mine).
 
  Therefore, if my model is correct, then low energy neutrinos would 
  merely be the photons we are familiar with and would be very easy to

  detect.
 
  -Original Message-
  From: Stephen Paul King [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 12:54 PM
  To: everything-list@eskimo.com
  Subject: Neutrino shield idea
 
 
  Howdy!
 
  I friend of mine has worked on a related idea that might help 
  this

  inverstigation. Please see:
 
  http://davidwoolsey.com/physics/ideas/neutrinoscope/index.html
 
  Kindest regards,
 
  Stephen
 
  - Original Message -
  From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Cc: everything-list@eskimo.com
  Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 11:57 AM
  Subject: RE: ROSS MODEL OF THE UNIVERSE - The Simplest Yet Theory of

  Everything
 
 
   Yes.  But building a neutrino shield would be difficult.
 




RE: Neutrino shield idea

2005-10-10 Thread John Ross
I say a neutrino does not have a rest mass.  It is a photon, like a very
high energy gamma ray photon.  I have seen photos of a neutrino
collision in a neutrino trap.  From the look of all the resulting
ionization tracks, it must have had a lot more energy than 40 ev.  I say
the energy of neutrinos is in the range of 300 mev!

-Original Message-
From: Russell Standish [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 3:00 PM
To: John Ross
Cc: 'Hal Ruhl'; everything-list@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea


According to special relativity, anything with a positive rest mass
travels slower than the speed of light. Neutrinos have been measured
with a positive rest mass, of around 40ev for the electron neutrino
IIRC, and higher values for the muon and tauon neutrinos.

I have never heard of either tardyon or luxon before either, but have
heard of tachyon, or faster than light particle. Clearly tardyon is
therefore slower than light, and luxon is at light speed.

Luxons therefore have zero rest mass, and tachyons have imaginary (ie
proportional to sqrt(-1)) rest mass.

Cheers

On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 03:06:55PM -0700, John Ross wrote:
 Where is the proof that a neutrino is not a photon.  I believe people 
 are only guessing that a neutrino is a tardyon, whatever in the hell a

 tardyon is.  Tardyons are not in my dictionary.
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Hal Ruhl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 2:50 PM
 To: everything-list@eskimo.com
 Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea
 
 
 As I understand it a photon is a luxon as is a gluon and a neutrino
 is a tardyon.
 
 Hal Ruhl
 
 
 At 04:49 PM 10/10/2005, you wrote:
 I think the beta decay model is wrong where it predicts neutrinos are
 basically different from photons.  I understand neutrinos travel at
the
 
 speed of light.  Only photons travel at the speed of light.
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Saibal Mitra [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 4:30 PM
 To: John Ross; everything-list@eskimo.com
 Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea
 
 
 This means that beta decay proves your model wrong.
 
 - Original Message -
 From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: 'Stephen Paul King' [EMAIL PROTECTED];
 everything-list@eskimo.com
 Sent: Saturday, October 08, 2005 12:35 AM
 Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea
 
 
   Thanks for the paper relating to detection of low energy
   neutrinos. However, according to my model, neutrinos are very,
very 
   high energy photons (off everybody's chart, except mine).
  
   Therefore, if my model is correct, then low energy neutrinos would
   merely be the photons we are familiar with and would be very easy
to
 
   detect.
  
   -Original Message-
   From: Stephen Paul King [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
   Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 12:54 PM
   To: everything-list@eskimo.com
   Subject: Neutrino shield idea
  
  
   Howdy!
  
   I friend of mine has worked on a related idea that might help
   this
 
   inverstigation. Please see:
  
   http://davidwoolsey.com/physics/ideas/neutrinoscope/index.html
  
   Kindest regards,
  
   Stephen
  
   - Original Message -
   From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   Cc: everything-list@eskimo.com
   Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 11:57 AM
   Subject: RE: ROSS MODEL OF THE UNIVERSE - The Simplest Yet Theory 
   of
 
   Everything
  
  
Yes.  But building a neutrino shield would be difficult.
  

-- 
*PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which
is of type application/pgp-signature. Don't worry, it is not a virus.
It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this email
came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you may safely
ignore this attachment.



A/Prof Russell Standish  Phone 8308 3119 (mobile)
Mathematics0425 253119 ()
UNSW SYDNEY 2052 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Australia
http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks
International prefix  +612, Interstate prefix 02





Re: Neutrino shield idea

2005-10-10 Thread daddycaylor

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v436/n7050/full/436467a.html


-Original Message-
From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Saibal Mitra' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; everything-list@eskimo.com
Sent: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 16:34:26 -0700
Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea

Name one.

-Original Message-
From: Saibal Mitra [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 3:27 PM
To: John Ross; everything-list@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea


There are a lot of experiments that have detected neutrinos and verified
their properties (which are completely different from photons).



RE: Neutrino shield idea

2005-10-10 Thread John Ross
I say any massless particle that has a charge supporting a Coulomb force
must travel at the speed of light or faster because the Coulomb force
travels at the speed of light and a charged massless particle will be
repelled by its own Coulomb force.

-Original Message-
From: Russell Standish [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 3:04 PM
To: John Ross
Cc: 'Stephen Paul King'; everything-list@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea


On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 09:11:04AM -0700, John Ross wrote:
 * Only photons travel at the speed of light.  (Except my tronnies that

 usually go faster than the speed of light.)

Who says? Any massless particle will travel at the speed of light.

-- 
*PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which
is of type application/pgp-signature. Don't worry, it is not a virus.
It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this email
came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you may safely
ignore this attachment.



A/Prof Russell Standish  Phone 8308 3119 (mobile)
Mathematics0425 253119 ()
UNSW SYDNEY 2052 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Australia
http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks
International prefix  +612, Interstate prefix 02





Re: Neutrino shield idea

2005-10-10 Thread Stephen Paul King

Dear John,

   There is replicated evidence that neutrinos have a non-zero mass. It is 
very small, but it is not zero.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrino

Onward!

Stephen

- Original Message - 
From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: 'Saibal Mitra' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; everything-list@eskimo.com
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 4:49 PM
Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea



I think the beta decay model is wrong where it predicts neutrinos are
basically different from photons.  I understand neutrinos travel at the
speed of light.  Only photons travel at the speed of light.

-Original Message-
From: Saibal Mitra [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 4:30 PM
To: John Ross; everything-list@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea


This means that beta decay proves your model wrong.

- Original Message - 
From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: 'Stephen Paul King' [EMAIL PROTECTED];
everything-list@eskimo.com
Sent: Saturday, October 08, 2005 12:35 AM
Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea



Thanks for the paper relating to detection of low energy neutrinos.
However, according to my model, neutrinos are very, very high energy
photons (off everybody's chart, except mine).

Therefore, if my model is correct, then low energy neutrinos would
merely be the photons we are familiar with and would be very easy to
detect.

-Original Message-
From: Stephen Paul King [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 12:54 PM
To: everything-list@eskimo.com
Subject: Neutrino shield idea


Howdy!

I friend of mine has worked on a related idea that might help this



inverstigation. Please see:

http://davidwoolsey.com/physics/ideas/neutrinoscope/index.html

Kindest regards,

Stephen

- Original Message -
From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: everything-list@eskimo.com
Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 11:57 AM
Subject: RE: ROSS MODEL OF THE UNIVERSE - The Simplest Yet Theory of
Everything


 Yes.  But building a neutrino shield would be difficult.





Re: Neutrino shield idea

2005-10-10 Thread Saibal Mitra
I'm sure you saw something else :-)

- Original Message - 
From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Russell Standish' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: 'Hal Ruhl' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; everything-list@eskimo.com
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 01:40 AM
Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea


 I say a neutrino does not have a rest mass.  It is a photon, like a very
 high energy gamma ray photon.  I have seen photos of a neutrino
 collision in a neutrino trap.  From the look of all the resulting
 ionization tracks, it must have had a lot more energy than 40 ev.  I say
 the energy of neutrinos is in the range of 300 mev!
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Russell Standish [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 3:00 PM
 To: John Ross
 Cc: 'Hal Ruhl'; everything-list@eskimo.com
 Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea
 
 
 According to special relativity, anything with a positive rest mass
 travels slower than the speed of light. Neutrinos have been measured
 with a positive rest mass, of around 40ev for the electron neutrino
 IIRC, and higher values for the muon and tauon neutrinos.
 
 I have never heard of either tardyon or luxon before either, but have
 heard of tachyon, or faster than light particle. Clearly tardyon is
 therefore slower than light, and luxon is at light speed.
 
 Luxons therefore have zero rest mass, and tachyons have imaginary (ie
 proportional to sqrt(-1)) rest mass.
 
 Cheers
 
 On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 03:06:55PM -0700, John Ross wrote:
  Where is the proof that a neutrino is not a photon.  I believe people 
  are only guessing that a neutrino is a tardyon, whatever in the hell a
 
  tardyon is.  Tardyons are not in my dictionary.
  
  -Original Message-
  From: Hal Ruhl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 2:50 PM
  To: everything-list@eskimo.com
  Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea
  
  
  As I understand it a photon is a luxon as is a gluon and a neutrino
  is a tardyon.
  
  Hal Ruhl
  
  
  At 04:49 PM 10/10/2005, you wrote:
  I think the beta decay model is wrong where it predicts neutrinos are
  basically different from photons.  I understand neutrinos travel at
 the
  
  speed of light.  Only photons travel at the speed of light.
  
  -Original Message-
  From: Saibal Mitra [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 4:30 PM
  To: John Ross; everything-list@eskimo.com
  Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea
  
  
  This means that beta decay proves your model wrong.
  
  - Original Message -
  From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  To: 'Stephen Paul King' [EMAIL PROTECTED];
  everything-list@eskimo.com
  Sent: Saturday, October 08, 2005 12:35 AM
  Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea
  
  
Thanks for the paper relating to detection of low energy
neutrinos. However, according to my model, neutrinos are very,
 very 
high energy photons (off everybody's chart, except mine).
   
Therefore, if my model is correct, then low energy neutrinos would
merely be the photons we are familiar with and would be very easy
 to
  
detect.
   
-Original Message-
From: Stephen Paul King [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 12:54 PM
To: everything-list@eskimo.com
Subject: Neutrino shield idea
   
   
Howdy!
   
I friend of mine has worked on a related idea that might help
this
  
inverstigation. Please see:
   
http://davidwoolsey.com/physics/ideas/neutrinoscope/index.html
   
Kindest regards,
   
Stephen
   
- Original Message -
From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: everything-list@eskimo.com
Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 11:57 AM
Subject: RE: ROSS MODEL OF THE UNIVERSE - The Simplest Yet Theory 
of
  
Everything
   
   
 Yes.  But building a neutrino shield would be difficult.
   
 
 -- 
 *PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which
 is of type application/pgp-signature. Don't worry, it is not a virus.
 It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this email
 came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you may safely
 ignore this attachment.
 
 
 
 A/Prof Russell Standish  Phone 8308 3119 (mobile)
 Mathematics0425 253119 ()
 UNSW SYDNEY 2052  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
 Australia
 http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks
 International prefix  +612, Interstate prefix 02
 
 
 



Re: Neutrino shield idea

2005-10-10 Thread Saibal Mitra
Faster than light effects lead to violations of causality. There are very
stringent experimental constraints against such effects.

- Original Message - 
From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Russell Standish' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: 'Stephen Paul King' [EMAIL PROTECTED];
everything-list@eskimo.com
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 01:43 AM
Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea


 I say any massless particle that has a charge supporting a Coulomb force
 must travel at the speed of light or faster because the Coulomb force
 travels at the speed of light and a charged massless particle will be
 repelled by its own Coulomb force.

 -Original Message-
 From: Russell Standish [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 3:04 PM
 To: John Ross
 Cc: 'Stephen Paul King'; everything-list@eskimo.com
 Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea


 On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 09:11:04AM -0700, John Ross wrote:
  * Only photons travel at the speed of light.  (Except my tronnies that

  usually go faster than the speed of light.)

 Who says? Any massless particle will travel at the speed of light.

 -- 
 *PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which
 is of type application/pgp-signature. Don't worry, it is not a virus.
 It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this email
 came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you may safely
 ignore this attachment.

 
 
 A/Prof Russell Standish  Phone 8308 3119 (mobile)
 Mathematics0425 253119 ()
 UNSW SYDNEY 2052  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 Australia
 http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks
 International prefix  +612, Interstate prefix 02
 
 




Re: Neutrino shield idea

2005-10-10 Thread Stephen Paul King

Dear John,

   This theory, as far as I have researched it, has problem with Eotvos 
experiements that consider particles that are sensitive to the weak force, 
such as radioactive elements. Not all particles interact with neutrinos, 
e.g. are sensituve to the weak force, and thus there should be a detectable 
difference in gravity between particles depending on this. This theory 
simply goes nowhere.


Onward,

Stephen

- Original Message - 
From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: 'Jesse Mazer' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; everything-list@eskimo.com
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 7:19 PM
Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea



Thanks for the response.

Your reference quotes Professor Feynman in part as follows:

So that is the end of that theory. 'Well,' you say, 'it was a good one,
and I got rid of the mathematics for a while. Maybe I could invent a
better one.' Maybe you can, because nobody knows the ultimate. But up to
today, from the time of Newton, no one has invented another theoretical
description of the mathematical machinery behind this law which does not
either say the same thing over again, or make the mathematics harder, or
predict some wrong phenomena. So there is no model of the theory of
gravity today, other than the mathematical form.

I say I have done what Professor Feynman said at that time had not been
done, namely invent a theoretical description of the mathematical of
Newton's law of gravity.

The example that Feynman rebuts is just the opposite of mine.  There the
sun blocks particles flying through the universe.  In my theory the sun
is the source of the particles.  We know that there are truly
150,000,000 neutrinos from the sun passing through every square
centimeter of the earth's surface every second.  We also know that
neutrino flux decrease by the inverse square of distance.  I have shown
how Coulomb forces from these neutrinos apply a force on the charges in
the earth pushing earth toward the source of the neutrinos!




RE: Neutrino shield idea

2005-10-10 Thread Jesse Mazer

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




RE: Neutrino shield idea

2005-10-10 Thread John Ross
Here is what the relevant part of your reference said:

The KamLAND (Kamioka Liquid-scintillator Anti-Neutrino Detector)
apparatus was purpose-built to catch a glimpse of these elusive
particles (see Fig. 5 on page 502). The detector is situated in the
centre of the largest Japanese island, Honshu, in a mine one kilometre
below the summit of Mt Ikenoyama, to reduce the effects of cos-mic rays
formed from particles other than antineutrinos. Antineutrinos are
occasionally captured by protons in KamLAND's 1-kilotonne,
13-metre-diameter scintillation detector (pictured above) in a process
known as inverse -decay. This produces a neutron, which combines with a
proton to form a deuteron and produces a characteristic -ray
('scintillation light') with an energy of 2.2 MeV. The light that this
reaction produces is detected as an electrical signal by an array of
photomultiplier devices surrounding the detector.

What happened (according to the Ross Model) was the neutrino (probably a
relatively low energy neutrino)was captured by an electron which turned
the electron into a very high energy electron that combined with a
hydrogen nuclei (a proton) to become a neutron which in turn combined
with another proton to become a deuteron which produced the
characteristic -ray with  energy of  2.2 Mev.  The author is right this
is reverse beta decay in which an electron (a beta particle) and a
neutrino are emitted from an atomic nuclei.  The best way an electron
can get inside a nuclei is by riding on a proton as part of a neutron.
See FIG. 9 and text at page 29 of my patent application for my proposed
model of a deuteron.

In any case this report certainly does not convince me that neutrinos
are not photons. 


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 4:41 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
everything-list@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea



http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v436/n7050/full/436467a.html


-Original Message-
From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Saibal Mitra' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; everything-list@eskimo.com
Sent: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 16:34:26 -0700
Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea

Name one.

-Original Message-
From: Saibal Mitra [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 3:27 PM
To: John Ross; everything-list@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea


There are a lot of experiments that have detected neutrinos and verified
their properties (which are completely different from photons).



RE: Neutrino shield idea

2005-10-10 Thread John Ross
I don't believe it.

-Original Message-
From: Stephen Paul King [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 4:45 PM
To: everything-list@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea


Dear John,

There is replicated evidence that neutrinos have a non-zero mass. It
is 
very small, but it is not zero.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrino

Onward!

Stephen

- Original Message - 
From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Saibal Mitra' [EMAIL PROTECTED];
everything-list@eskimo.com
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 4:49 PM
Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea


I think the beta decay model is wrong where it predicts neutrinos are  
basically different from photons.  I understand neutrinos travel at the

speed of light.  Only photons travel at the speed of light.

 -Original Message-
 From: Saibal Mitra [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 4:30 PM
 To: John Ross; everything-list@eskimo.com
 Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea


 This means that beta decay proves your model wrong.

 - Original Message -
 From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: 'Stephen Paul King' [EMAIL PROTECTED];
 everything-list@eskimo.com
 Sent: Saturday, October 08, 2005 12:35 AM
 Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea


 Thanks for the paper relating to detection of low energy neutrinos.

 However, according to my model, neutrinos are very, very high energy 
 photons (off everybody's chart, except mine).

 Therefore, if my model is correct, then low energy neutrinos would 
 merely be the photons we are familiar with and would be very easy to 
 detect.

 -Original Message-
 From: Stephen Paul King [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 12:54 PM
 To: everything-list@eskimo.com
 Subject: Neutrino shield idea


 Howdy!

 I friend of mine has worked on a related idea that might help 
 this

 inverstigation. Please see:

 http://davidwoolsey.com/physics/ideas/neutrinoscope/index.html

 Kindest regards,

 Stephen

 - Original Message -
 From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Cc: everything-list@eskimo.com
 Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 11:57 AM
 Subject: RE: ROSS MODEL OF THE UNIVERSE - The Simplest Yet Theory of 
 Everything


  Yes.  But building a neutrino shield would be difficult.
 



RE: Neutrino shield idea

2005-10-10 Thread John Ross
Have you ever heard of the Big Bang and the period just after where
the universe expanded much faster than the speed of light.

-Original Message-
From: Saibal Mitra [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 4:49 PM
To: John Ross; 'Russell Standish'
Cc: 'Stephen Paul King'; everything-list@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea


Faster than light effects lead to violations of causality. There are
very stringent experimental constraints against such effects.

- Original Message - 
From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Russell Standish' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: 'Stephen Paul King' [EMAIL PROTECTED];
everything-list@eskimo.com
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 01:43 AM
Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea


 I say any massless particle that has a charge supporting a Coulomb 
 force must travel at the speed of light or faster because the Coulomb 
 force travels at the speed of light and a charged massless particle 
 will be repelled by its own Coulomb force.

 -Original Message-
 From: Russell Standish [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 3:04 PM
 To: John Ross
 Cc: 'Stephen Paul King'; everything-list@eskimo.com
 Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea


 On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 09:11:04AM -0700, John Ross wrote:
  * Only photons travel at the speed of light.  (Except my tronnies 
  that

  usually go faster than the speed of light.)

 Who says? Any massless particle will travel at the speed of light.

 --
 *PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which
 is of type application/pgp-signature. Don't worry, it is not a
virus.
 It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this email
 came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you may
safely
 ignore this attachment.

 --
 --
 
 A/Prof Russell Standish  Phone 8308 3119 (mobile)
 Mathematics0425 253119 ()
 UNSW SYDNEY 2052  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 Australia
 http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks
 International prefix  +612, Interstate prefix 02
 --
 --
 




Re: Neutrino shield idea

2005-10-10 Thread Russell Standish
Take a look at arXiv:hep-ex/0412060. It is an experimental resolution
of the Solar Neutrino problem, which I think would be required reading
for your interests.

On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 04:34:26PM -0700, John Ross wrote:
 Name one.
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Saibal Mitra [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 3:27 PM
 To: John Ross; everything-list@eskimo.com
 Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea
 
 
 There are a lot of experiments that have detected neutrinos and verified
 their properties (which are completely different from photons).
 
 

-- 
*PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which
is of type application/pgp-signature. Don't worry, it is not a
virus. It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this
email came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you
may safely ignore this attachment.


A/Prof Russell Standish  Phone 8308 3119 (mobile)
Mathematics0425 253119 ()
UNSW SYDNEY 2052 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Australiahttp://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks
International prefix  +612, Interstate prefix 02



pgpAUqdxoLntJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature


RE: Neutrino shield idea

2005-10-10 Thread John Ross
I have not dealt with Mercury's orbit.  My theory can explain the double
slit results just as well as any other theory, better than most.  I have
not tried to calculate the muon magnetic moment.  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.


-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



RE: Neutrino shield idea

2005-10-10 Thread Jesse Mazer

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






RE: Neutrino shield idea

2005-10-07 Thread John Ross
Thanks for the paper relating to detection of low energy neutrinos.
However, according to my model, neutrinos are very, very high energy
photons (off everybody's chart, except mine).

Therefore, if my model is correct, then low energy neutrinos would
merely be the photons we are familiar with and would be very easy to
detect.

-Original Message-
From: Stephen Paul King [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 12:54 PM
To: everything-list@eskimo.com
Subject: Neutrino shield idea


Howdy!

I friend of mine has worked on a related idea that might help this 
inverstigation. Please see:

http://davidwoolsey.com/physics/ideas/neutrinoscope/index.html

Kindest regards,

Stephen

- Original Message - 
From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: everything-list@eskimo.com
Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 11:57 AM
Subject: RE: ROSS MODEL OF THE UNIVERSE - The Simplest Yet Theory of 
Everything


 Yes.  But building a neutrino shield would be difficult.



Re: Neutrino shield idea

2005-10-07 Thread Saibal Mitra
This means that beta decay proves your model wrong.

- Original Message - 
From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Stephen Paul King' [EMAIL PROTECTED];
everything-list@eskimo.com
Sent: Saturday, October 08, 2005 12:35 AM
Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea


 Thanks for the paper relating to detection of low energy neutrinos.
 However, according to my model, neutrinos are very, very high energy
 photons (off everybody's chart, except mine).

 Therefore, if my model is correct, then low energy neutrinos would
 merely be the photons we are familiar with and would be very easy to
 detect.

 -Original Message-
 From: Stephen Paul King [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 12:54 PM
 To: everything-list@eskimo.com
 Subject: Neutrino shield idea


 Howdy!

 I friend of mine has worked on a related idea that might help this
 inverstigation. Please see:

 http://davidwoolsey.com/physics/ideas/neutrinoscope/index.html

 Kindest regards,

 Stephen

 - Original Message - 
 From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Cc: everything-list@eskimo.com
 Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 11:57 AM
 Subject: RE: ROSS MODEL OF THE UNIVERSE - The Simplest Yet Theory of
 Everything


  Yes.  But building a neutrino shield would be difficult.




Re: Neutrino shield idea

2005-10-07 Thread Stephen Paul King

Dear Russell,

   I hope you meant to write that photons are bosons with spin1. Otherwise 
we would have a hard time explaining Maxwell's Field equations. ;-) About 
the differences between neutrinos and photons, we could also point out that 
photons have a null extension in the time direction and neutrinos, having a 
small but non-zero mass have an extension in the time direction - I am 
thinking here in terms of how we would embed our particles in a Minkowski or 
equivalent space-time diagrams.


Kindest regards,

Stephen

- Original Message - 
From: Russell Standish [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: 'Stephen Paul King' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 
everything-list@eskimo.com

Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 6:12 PM
Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea


Neutrinos are fermions with spin 1/2. Photons are bosons with spin
0. This is about as chalk and cheese as you can get. The difference is
not energy. 



RE: Neutrino shield idea

2005-10-07 Thread Jesse Mazer

John Ross wrote:



Thanks for the paper relating to detection of low energy neutrinos.
However, according to my model, neutrinos are very, very high energy
photons (off everybody's chart, except mine).

Therefore, if my model is correct, then low energy neutrinos would
merely be the photons we are familiar with and would be very easy to
detect.


John, does your theory involve a set of mathematical equations which can be 
used to make detailed quantitative predictions about all the same situations 
that mainstream physics makes predictions about, or do your ideas not go 
beyond intuitive word-pictures? Also, do you have any response to the 
criticisms of pushing gravity theories made in the wikipedia article I 
linked to and in the excerpt from Feynman's book I quoted?


Jesse




Re: Neutrino shield idea

2005-10-07 Thread Russell Standish
On Fri, Oct 07, 2005 at 09:02:17PM -0400, Stephen Paul King wrote:
 Dear Russell,
 
I hope you meant to write that photons are bosons with spin1. Otherwise 

Yes, you are right. Mea culpa! Put it down to the couple of decades
since I studied this stuff...

 we would have a hard time explaining Maxwell's Field equations. ;-) About 
 the differences between neutrinos and photons, we could also point out that 
 photons have a null extension in the time direction and neutrinos, having a 
 small but non-zero mass have an extension in the time direction - I am 
 thinking here in terms of how we would embed our particles in a Minkowski 
 or equivalent space-time diagrams.
 

Indeed - I thought about raising this difference also. Neutrinos are
now accepted as having nonzero mass, although that wasn't the case
when I was studying physics. Also, this guy would probably come back
with photons having nonzero rest mass! After all, he reckons Einstein
goofed, and that relativity is a load of old cobblers, so having
nonzero restmass particles traveling at the speed of light wouldn't be
a problem for him!

 Kindest regards,
 
 Stephen
 
 - Original Message - 
 From: Russell Standish [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Cc: 'Stephen Paul King' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 
 everything-list@eskimo.com
 Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 6:12 PM
 Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea
 
 
 Neutrinos are fermions with spin 1/2. Photons are bosons with spin
 0. This is about as chalk and cheese as you can get. The difference is
 not energy. 

-- 
*PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which
is of type application/pgp-signature. Don't worry, it is not a
virus. It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this
email came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you
may safely ignore this attachment.


A/Prof Russell Standish  Phone 8308 3119 (mobile)
Mathematics0425 253119 ()
UNSW SYDNEY 2052 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Australiahttp://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks
International prefix  +612, Interstate prefix 02



pgpKEahVLEFpw.pgp
Description: PGP signature