Thunderbolts Forum

'13-01-21, 00:45 Morphix	Standard Model Nuclear Sun Neutrinos Found? In the interest of weighing argumants for electric universe vs gravity universe theories, I look for good arguments and evidence on both sides. One EU criticism of the standard sun model is that they never did detect the predicted/required quantity of neutrinos, and further that an ad hoc theory about electron nuetrinos morphing into other kinds of neutrinos was made up to keep the fusion model of the sun alive. These two articles claim that they did find the required missing neutrinos, and that the transformation of electron neutrinos to muon and tau neutrinos has recently been demonstrated by an experiment in China. http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2012/03/physicists-in~ http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/articles/bah~ Comments?
'13-01-21, 08:51 Goldminer	Re: Standard Model Nuclear Sun Neutrinos Found? Morphix wrote: In the interest of weighing argumants for electric universe vs gravity universe theories, I look for good arguments and evidence on both sides. One EU criticism of the standard sun model is that they never did detect the predicted/required quantity of neutrinos, and further that an ad hoc theory about electron nuetrinos morphing into other kinds of neutrinos was made up to keep the fusion model of the sun alive. These two articles claim that they did find the required missing neutrinos, and that the transformation of electron neutrinos to muon and tau neutrinos has recently been demonstrated by an experiment in China. http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2012/03/physicists-in~ http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/articles/bah~ Comments? Why neutrinos don't exist
'13-01-21, 12:35 tayga	Re: Standard Model Nuclear Sun Neutrinos Found? Goldminer wrote: Why neutrinos don't exist Thanks for that GM. I wasn't familiar with that (energetic) side of the argument. What I have seen is the argument about spin addition: n (1/2) =/= p (1/2) + e (1/2) requiring the inclusion of another particle with spin 1/2, no charge and no mass in neutron decay. This ONLY holds if you assume that spin can't be described classically and can't be treated as a vector, which makes no sense whatsoever. Neutrinos have a similar life history to black holes. Whereas black holes were originally supposed to allow nothing to escape from their huge gravity fields, now they are the most powerful emitters in the universe. Similarly, whereas neutrinos were originally posited as massless particles, they can now have a huge range of masses. My own theory is that the black hole and the neutrino have similar spin, mass and charge. All zero.
'13-01-21, 12:41 tayga	Re: Standard Model Nuclear Sun Neutrinos Found? Morphix wrote: In the interest of weighing argumants for electric universe vs gravity universe theories, I look for good arguments and evidence on both sides. One EU criticism of the standard sun model is that they never did detect the predicted/required quantity of neutrinos, and further that an ad hoc theory about electron nuetrinos morphing into other kinds of neutrinos was made up to keep the fusion model of the sun alive. These two articles claim that they did find the required missing neutrinos, and that the transformation of electron neutrinos to muon and tau neutrinos has recently been demonstrated by an experiment in China. http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2012/03/physicists-in~ http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/articles/bah~ Comments? Apart from the fact that there is no compelling evidence that neutrinos exist at all, missing from the demonstration of the solar neutrino flavour-change argument is a measurement of the neutrino flux at or near the Sun. This would be required to demonstrate that neutrinos DO change flavour en route to Earth. At best, and ignoring all other falsifying evidence, the Chinese experiment demonstrates that they MIGHT.
'13-01-21, 21:21 Morphix	Re: Standard Model Nuclear Sun Neutrinos Found? [/quote]Why neutrinos don't exist[/quote] Wow, it didn't occur to me that there was doubt about the existence of ANY neutrinos. Thanks for the link and I look forward to reading the meterial referenced there.
'13-01-21, 21:31 Morphix	Re: Standard Model Nuclear Sun Neutrinos Found? Apart from the fact that there is no compelling evidence that neutrinos exist at all, missing from the demonstration of the solar neutrino flavour-change argument is a measurement of the neutrino flux at or near the Sun. This would be required to demonstrate that neutrinos DO change flavour en route to Earth. At best, and ignoring all other falsifying evidence, the Chinese experiment demonstrates that they MIGHT. To be fair, one could say the same of laboratory experiments with plasma relative to what is possibly happening out in the cosmos. The point of the Chinese experiment was to detect electron neutrinos near their point of origin and then see if they morphed over some distance. IF electron neutrinos exist and were detected, and then IF other flavor neutrinos replaced them, it woul bshow that such a transformation actually happens in some settings, and that it is at least possible in others. Like I said above, I look forward to reading arguments against the existence of neutrinos of any kind.
'13-01-22, 09:08 Morphix	Re: Standard Model Nuclear Sun Neutrinos Found? I looked at the autodynamics link regarding Carezani's belief that nuetrinos do not exist, but found that he requires the existence of yet other undiscovered particles and decay modes! From Wikipedia on autodynamics: the existence of additional particles that have not been observed by mainstream physicists (including the "picograviton" and the "electromuon"), the existence of additional decay modes for muons and interaction modes for energetic atomic nuclei. [edit] Citing one scientist's theory that has one website dedicated to telling its story is not a strong case against the existence of neutrinos, Anyone have a stronger case against the claim by scientists that they have found the missing neutrinos and thereby supported the nuclear sun model?
'13-01-22, 12:36 Goldminer	Re: Standard Model Nuclear Sun Neutrinos Found? Morphix wrote: I looked at the autodynamics link regarding Carezani's belief that nuetrinos do not exist, but found that he requires the existence of yet other undiscovered particles and decay modes! From Wikipedia on autodynamics: the existence of additional particles that have not been observed by mainstream physicists (including the "picograviton" and the "electromuon"), the existence of additional decay modes for muons and interaction modes for energetic atomic nuclei. [edit] Citing one scientist's theory that has one website dedicated to telling its story is not a strong case against the existence of neutrinos, Anyone have a stronger case against the claim by scientists that they have found the missing neutrinos and thereby supported the nuclear sun model? The web site link provided above cites the history of how the original "neutrino" idea originated. That is not a theory, it is history. Laurence Hecht has researched the history of The Suppressed Electrodynamics of Ampère-Gauss-Weber His article is not theory, it is history. Stephen Crothers has researched the history of the Schwarzschild metric. The history of that development is buried too. Mainstream science has a history of ignoring the history and development of ideas and evidence when it gets in the way of their own exciting new fantasies. Neutrinos with electric charge are hardly neutral. Yes, the "detectors" are detecting something. What produced the tracks in their detectors is not "settled physics" if there is such a thing as that. Building additional fantasies upon tenuous ideas does not make the foundation of such fantasies stronger, it just buries logic and common sense, not to mention the furtherance of real scientific understanding.
'13-01-22, 18:18 tayga	Re: Standard Model Nuclear Sun Neutrinos Found? Morphix wrote: Citing one scientist's theory that has one website dedicated to telling its story is not a strong case against the existence of neutrinos, Anyone have a stronger case against the claim by scientists that they have found the missing neutrinos and thereby supported the nuclear sun model? The experimental and logical arguments against neutrinos stand on their own and do not rely on the acceptance of autodynamics.
'13-01-22, 22:23 Morphix	Re: Standard Model Nuclear Sun Neutrinos Found? Thanks for the link to "The Suppressed Electrodynamics of Ampère-Gauss-Weber" which was very good. I did look at links to the history of how the neutrino was proposed to "explain" excess energy carried away by invented massless particels http://www.autodynamics.org/main/index.php?module=pagemaste~ I guess the idea that neutrinos may have been dreampt up as an educated guess to fix a problem doesn't trouble me too much if experiments provided support for the existence of such postulated particles. After all, science is part already supported facts and part imagined solutions to anomalous phenoena or measuremnts. The problem arises when a model is severely flawed and we get into ad hoc fantasies to keep it alive. On this I totally agree. In any case, if the collective EU/you were citing a strong list of references to refute neutrinos, either in general or at least relative to a nuclear sun, what would it comprise, keeping in mind the recent Chinese experiment I referenced at the start ofvthis thread.
'13-01-23, 10:26 Morphix	Re: Standard Model Nuclear Sun Neutrinos Found? The Suppressed Electrodynamics of Ampère-Gauss-Weber article appears in the online magazine 21st Century Science and Technology, which is a creature of Lyndon Larouche, who is a wingnut. If you peruse articles in 21st Century you can see that it is part of the Larouche machine. http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/sample.html#Physics In any case, if neutrinos are to have less than zero mass in terms of their influence on theory, we need better sources and critics. Have Arp, Scott or Thornhill ever contested the existence of neutrinos?
'13-01-23, 11:50 Goldminer	Re: Standard Model Nuclear Sun Neutrinos Found? Morphix wrote: The Suppressed Electrodynamics of Ampère-Gauss-Weber article appears in the online magazine 21st Century Science and Technology, which is a creature of Lyndon Larouche, who is a wingnut. If you peruse articles in 21st Century you can see that it is part of the Larouche machine. http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/sample.html#Physics In any case, if neutrinos are to have less than zero mass in terms of their influence on theory, we need better sources and critics. Have Arp, Scott or Thornhill ever contested the existence of neutrinos? Mainstream propaganda describes LaRouche as a wing nut. They also describe the EU paradigm as a wing nut bunch of ideas. So yeah, believe all the propaganda that comes your way! So, you think just because someone with different political ideas reveals some actual history, they should be buried? By the way, you have not revealed anything of which I was not aware. I don't swallow Lyndon's propaganda whole cloth. (I don't swallow cloth anyway) I am skeptical of everything. (At least, I think I am.) Here is a list of articles about Robert J Moon's model of the atomic nucleus. Laurence Hecht (he's the author of the articles) was imprisoned by the "Federal Government" for (the way I understand it, victimless crime) of basically publishing stuff with which they disagree. Moon's model makes sense to me. Anyway the topic is about neutrinos.
'13-01-23, 13:52 nick c	Re: Standard Model Nuclear Sun Neutrinos Found? morphix wrote: In any case, if neutrinos are to have less than zero mass in terms of their influence on theory, we need better sources and critics. Have Arp, Scott or Thornhill ever contested the existence of neutrinos? I do not know about Arp, but Scott and Thornhill seem to accept (inferred from their writing) the existence of neutrinos. Thornhill wrote: The most collapsed form of matter is the neutrino, which has a vanishingly small mass. However, the neutrino must contain all of the charges required to form two particles – a particle and its antiparticle. This symmetry explains why a neutrino is considered to be its own anti-particle. A neutrino may accept energy from a gamma ray to reconstitute a particle and its anti-particle. "Empty space" is full of neutrinos. They are the repositories of matter in the universe, awaiting the burst of gamma-radiation to expand them to form the stuff of atoms. The weird "zoo" of short-lived particles created in particle accelerators and seen in cosmic rays are simply unstable resonant systems of charge. http://www.holoscience.com/wp/a-real-th ... verything/ Scott wrote: The neutrino problem is a hurdle only for the standard fusion model. In the Electric Sun model there is no energy produced in the core - radiant energy is released at the surface by electric arc discharge. So, there is no 'missing neutrino' problem for the electric Sun model. The electron-nuetrinos that are observed are probably produced by fusion taking place at the solar surface that produces heavy elements (other than hydrogen and helium). http://electric-cosmos.org/sudbury.htm
'13-01-23, 21:58 Morphix	Re: Standard Model Nuclear Sun Neutrinos Found? Goldminer wrote: Morphix wrote: The Suppressed Electrodynamics of Ampère-Gauss-Weber article appears in the online magazine 21st Century Science and Technology, which is a creature of Lyndon Larouche, who is a wingnut. If you peruse articles in 21st Century you can see that it is part of the Larouche machine. http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/sample.html#Physics In any case, if neutrinos are to have less than zero mass in terms of their influence on theory, we need better sources and critics. Have Arp, Scott or Thornhill ever contested the existence of neutrinos?Mainstream propaganda describes LaRouche as a wing nut. They also describe the EU paradigm as a wing nut bunch of ideas. So yeah, believe all the propaganda that comes your way! So, you think just because someone with different political ideas reveals some actual history, they should be buried? By the way, you have not revealed anything of which I was not aware. I don't swallow Lyndon's propaganda whole cloth. (I don't swallow cloth anyway) I am skeptical of everything. (At least, I think I am.) Here is a list of articles about Robert J Moon's model of the atomic nucleus. Laurence Hecht (he's the author of the articles) was imprisoned by the "Federal Government" for (the way I understand it, victimless crime) of basically publishing stuff with which they disagree. Moon's model makes sense to me. Anyway the topic is about neutrinos. Don't get all worked up, I am pushing you and others to present your best arguments and evidence. So far as Lerouche goes, I met the man back in the 70s at a lecture/rally he gave, wherein he put forth his ideas about Plato vs. Aristotle and conspiracy theories just as described in the wikipedia article, etc. He is a wingnut, and I have to wonder about anyone who supports his ideas, including Hecht. That is not saying that his account of electric theories is historically incorrect, I honestly don't know, but I'd hesitate to present his account to any scientist I was hoping to interest in EU theories. And yes the topic is about neutrinos, but specifically about the best case against their emanation from the sun as claimed by standard theory adherents, so questioning the reliability/judgement of a source is perfectly appropriate. Is will look at the Moon material. Thanks.
'13-01-23, 22:04 Morphix	Re: Standard Model Nuclear Sun Neutrinos Found? nick c wrote: morphix wrote:In any case, if neutrinos are to have less than zero mass in terms of their influence on theory, we need better sources and critics. Have Arp, Scott or Thornhill ever contested the existence of neutrinos?I do not know about Arp, but Scott and Thornhill seem to accept (inferred from their writing) the existence of neutrinos. Thornhill wrote: The most collapsed form of matter is the neutrino, which has a vanishingly small mass. However, the neutrino must contain all of the charges required to form two particles – a particle and its antiparticle. This symmetry explains why a neutrino is considered to be its own anti-particle. A neutrino may accept energy from a gamma ray to reconstitute a particle and its anti-particle. "Empty space" is full of neutrinos. They are the repositories of matter in the universe, awaiting the burst of gamma-radiation to expand them to form the stuff of atoms. The weird "zoo" of short-lived particles created in particle accelerators and seen in cosmic rays are simply unstable resonant systems of charge. http://www.holoscience.com/wp/a-real-th ... verything/ Scott wrote: The neutrino problem is a hurdle only for the standard fusion model. In the Electric Sun model there is no energy produced in the core - radiant energy is released at the surface by electric arc discharge. So, there is no 'missing neutrino' problem for the electric Sun model. The electron-nuetrinos that are observed are probably produced by fusion taking place at the solar surface that produces heavy elements (other than hydrogen and helium). http://electric-cosmos.org/sudbury.htm Thank you very much. From the above it looks like Thornhill and Scott are not contesting the existence of nuetrinos, at least not publicly, so perhaps relative to my question it is best to accept their existence for the time being and simply argue that there are problems with recent claims as to their purportedly measured quantity?