Pretending Subquarks actually exist!

  • 483 Replies
  • 35870 Views
*

JackBlack

  • 21558
Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #360 on: July 09, 2020, 04:05:32 AM »
https://physicsworld.com/a/fractional-charge-carriers-discovered
Last month, two groups of physicists revealed the first direct evidence that an electric current can be carried by quasiparticles with fractional charge.
Again, that in no way supports your claims.
They are not claiming they are sub-components of electrons or quarks.
Instead, they are


Appealing to preons and subquarks being the same thing doesn't help you, as that Nobel prize dealt with neither.
Again, electrons combining to form a larger, composite quasiparticle is in no way evidence of subquarks or preons.

You need a medical checkup.
The electrons themselves are divided into particles with fractional charges!
Have you lost your mind to claim that now electrons form larger particles?
This is beyond ridiculous: you certainly need medical help.
No, I don't need medical help. You just need to stop lying and actually address what has been said.

Your article states it quite clearly:
Quote
All the interacting electrons are there but they behave as if they are non-interacting quasiparticles with charges of one-third

Your own source refutes you.
You have multiple electrons interacting to form a quasiparticle. They do not say the electrons are being split into their subcomponents.
Now stop spamming the same lies again and again.

Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #361 on: July 09, 2020, 04:21:04 AM »
You didn't finish 1. Paragaph

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #362 on: July 09, 2020, 05:34:08 AM »
You didn't finish 1. Paragaph
Gestapo reply checker are you? Make your own replies and stop criticising everybody else's.

Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #363 on: July 09, 2020, 06:00:44 AM »
You didn't finish 1. Paragaph
Gestapo reply checker are you? Make your own replies and stop criticising everybody else's.

It was like reminder. Like if he went to WC and came back forgetting to finish.

*

cikljamas

  • 2432
  • Ex nihilo nihil fit
Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #364 on: July 09, 2020, 07:14:43 AM »
I am trying to post something in my own thread and after several attempts i am still unable to do that, so let's see if i can post this little post here...
"I can't breathe" George Floyd RIP

*

sokarul

  • 19303
  • Extra Racist
Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #365 on: July 09, 2020, 07:40:56 AM »
It's a quote from the article.

Mainstream science is beginning to understand that gravity must involve quantum entanglement, superluminal speeds, instant action-at-a-distance.
It’s fractional charges. It’s not worm holes sucking aether while always knowing which way is down.
« Last Edit: July 09, 2020, 08:11:55 AM by sokarul »
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #366 on: July 09, 2020, 07:59:44 AM »
I am trying to post something in my own thread and after several attempts i am still unable to do that, so let's see if i can post this little post here...

What? Like on "Flat Earth Belivers"?

*

NotSoSkeptical

  • 8548
  • Flat like a droplet of water.
Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #367 on: July 09, 2020, 08:24:18 AM »
If these new types of "particles" with charges that are fractions of electrons are quasi-particles, and quasi-particles are sub-quarks/preons, then the following statement would be true.

Electrons create preons.

Do electrons create preons?


I already answered your question.

The electron, in current mainstream science, has nine components, a substructure of nine preons/subquarks.

That is where the fractional charges come from.

In reality, these preons are the electrons themselves, having a negative charge.

Preons = subquarks.

No you didn't answer the question.

You are now saying that preons are electrons.  How can electrons form a new "particle"  that you call a preon if preons are themselves electrons?




Rabinoz RIP

That would put you in the same category as pedophile perverts like John Davis, NSS, robots like Stash, Shifter, and victimized kids like Alexey.

*

Stash

  • Ethical Stash
  • 13398
  • I am car!
Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #368 on: July 09, 2020, 12:51:48 PM »
You didn't finish 1. Paragaph
Gestapo reply checker are you? Make your own replies and stop criticising everybody else's.

It was like reminder. Like if he went to WC and came back forgetting to finish.

I think we're ok without your "reminders". If you have something to add to the conversation, add it. Otherwise mind your own business and stop with the perpetual low content posts.

Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #369 on: July 11, 2020, 10:32:31 AM »
Going bach to Tachyon quote, i think doc is waiting for results to be 100% sure. We don't know if it is there if we didn't find it. Like playing hide and seek. You might hear movement, or see shadows but you don't know if persion is hiding there 100%. Maybie it is cat or that shadow is just shadow of bush, but it is most likly persion. Until you find it, you are unsertain.

Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #370 on: July 12, 2020, 04:42:45 AM »
Why does all of you except snadokhan deny tachyons? It won't prove Aether or Flat Earth. What is wrong with agreeing with sandokhan?

Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #371 on: July 12, 2020, 04:45:17 AM »
Abd yes, electrons have subcomponents

Quote
Pure science.

https://phys.org/news/2014-12-electrons-evidence-exotic-behaviors.html

How electrons split: New evidence of exotic behaviors

https://www.nature.com/articles/nphys3172

Our results establish the existence of fractional quasiparticles in the high-energy spectrum of a quasi-two-dimensional antiferromagnet.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/electron-splits-into-quasiparticles/

In 1996, physicists split an electron into a holon and spinon. Now, van den Brink and his colleagues have broken an electron into an orbiton and a spinon, as reported in Nature today.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg15721195-400-splitting-the-electron/

But that pillar seems to be crumbling. Scientists have pushed open a window onto an unexpected world of quantum strangeness in which the electron’s “indivisible” unit of charge can be carved up to make particles carrying one-third or one-fifth of a unit, or even fractions far smaller 

(Form sandokhan, proof)

*

JJA

  • 6869
  • Math is math!
Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #372 on: July 12, 2020, 04:52:02 AM »
Why does all of you except snadokhan deny tachyons? It won't prove Aether or Flat Earth. What is wrong with agreeing with sandokhan?

We disagree because he claims with 100% certainty that Tachyons are a real particle and knows exactly what they are and how they work.

But science has discovered no evidence they exist at all. Unless Sandokhan has a 100 mile wide particle accelerator in his backyard and has some proof, all he is doing is quoting other people that also have no evidence.

Nobody can say for certain if Tachyons exist, or if Unicorns or Dragons exist.  But until we actually can look at one of them, they are all imaginary.  Tachyons are no more real than fire breathing, flying, talking magic dragons.


Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #373 on: July 12, 2020, 05:32:14 AM »
Hey, paper proved that they most likly exsist. We are waiting to find them. There is still chance they aren't real.

Quote
We don't know if it is there if we didn't find it. Like playing hide and seek. You might hear movement, or see shadows but you don't know if persion is hiding there 100%. Maybie it is cat or that shadow is just shadow of bush, but it is most likly persion. Until you find it, you are unsertain.

*

JJA

  • 6869
  • Math is math!
Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #374 on: July 12, 2020, 05:58:55 AM »
Hey, paper proved that they most likly exsist. We are waiting to find them. There is still chance they aren't real.

Quote
We don't know if it is there if we didn't find it. Like playing hide and seek. You might hear movement, or see shadows but you don't know if persion is hiding there 100%. Maybie it is cat or that shadow is just shadow of bush, but it is most likly persion. Until you find it, you are unsertain.

That's not how science works.

A paper doesn't prove anything, experiments provide evidence if a theory is correct or not.

Tachyons have zero experimental evidence.  Exactly the same evidence that we have of magic talking dragons.  Both are imaginary.

There is no paper that proves Tachyons, or dragons exist.

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 7049
Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #375 on: July 12, 2020, 06:40:17 AM »
Tachyons have zero experimental evidence.

There is no paper that proves Tachyons.


What if I were to produce such a paper (published in the best journals) describing an experiment carried out by the best experts in the field, which does actually prove the existence of particles with negative mass (tachyons)?



*

sokarul

  • 19303
  • Extra Racist
Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #376 on: July 12, 2020, 06:45:48 AM »
I would produce them to the proper governing body. Currently accepted theory is they don't exist. Posting one paper and one experiment doesn't mean much, let alone just to the flat earth society.
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

*

JJA

  • 6869
  • Math is math!
Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #377 on: July 12, 2020, 08:07:39 AM »
Tachyons have zero experimental evidence.

There is no paper that proves Tachyons.


What if I were to produce such a paper (published in the best journals) describing an experiment carried out by the best experts in the field, which does actually prove the existence of particles with negative mass (tachyons)?

Then I would be very excited as I waited for others to verify the findings.

If they were replicated and verified that you could use them to send information?  I'd be more excited than ever in my life.

Faster than light particles?  Negative mass?  That would open up so many possibilities for space travel, communications and science in general.

It would be world shattering.

I'd love it.

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 7049
Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #378 on: July 12, 2020, 08:17:56 AM »
Faster than light particles already have been discovered, see quantum entanglement, Maxwell's original superluminal e/m set of equations.

Here is a preview of the huge experiment carried out by some of the top physicists in their field, no further need to carry out another test at KATRIN, a definite result that proves that muon neutrinos are tachyons (negative/imaginary mass):



You won't believe what happened after this.

*

JJA

  • 6869
  • Math is math!
Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #379 on: July 12, 2020, 08:27:06 AM »
Faster than light particles already have been discovered, see quantum entanglement, Maxwell's original superluminal e/m set of equations.

Here is a preview of the huge experiment carried out by some of the top physicists in their field, no further need to carry out another test at KATRIN, a definite result that proves that muon neutrinos are tachyons (negative/imaginary mass):



You won't believe what happened after this.

Quantum entanglement isn't the same thing as tachyons.

You can't send information faster than light using quantum entanglement, and sending information faster than light is what is exciting about tachyons, which as of yet, are imaginary.

I can shine a laser pointer at the moon and move it across it, and that dot can certainly travel faster than light if I move my hand quick enough, but it's not true ftl. Quantum entanglement and other pseudo-ftl is just like that. You can't use any of it to send information, therefore it's not really faster than light.

Your image you linked is not proof, link to the actual article.  I'm not aware of any confirmed results finding ftl particles, only a few that were later found to be from faulty equipment.  Please link actual sources, not cherry-picked screenshots.

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 7049
Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #380 on: July 12, 2020, 08:37:11 AM »
No faulty equipment, no need to confirm the findings, negative mass confirmed by six standard deviations.

Eleven of the biggest names in the field of neutrino detection, experiment which was carried out at one of the top laboratories in the world.

And yet, this result was dismissed by these scientists since they could not accept it.

Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #381 on: July 12, 2020, 09:35:38 AM »
Quote
And yet, this result was dismissed by these scientists since they could not accept it.

Or maybie you misunderstod something like you always do

*

sokarul

  • 19303
  • Extra Racist
Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #382 on: July 12, 2020, 10:08:59 AM »
Neutrinos are being researched as we speak.

They are not tachyons.
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 7049
Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #383 on: July 12, 2020, 10:12:55 AM »
The muon neutrino sure is:


*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #384 on: July 12, 2020, 10:24:46 AM »
The muon neutrino sure is:


A pasted in bit with no source is a bit useless!

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 7049
Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #385 on: July 12, 2020, 10:31:51 AM »
I keep the best stuff for my AFET.

The paper was posted on the CERN website, the best scientists in neutrino detection theory, one of the highest rated laboratories in the world.

They detected the tachyon (negative/imaginary mass). Confirmed by six standard deviations.

Yet, they dismissed this result, since they could not accept it.

*

JJA

  • 6869
  • Math is math!
Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #386 on: July 12, 2020, 10:40:15 AM »
The muon neutrino sure is:



You are deliberately misrepresenting the paper by selectively quoting it.  Please link to the entire paper.  You can't just cut and paste bits of things without allowing anyone to read the entire paper. That's a dishonest way to debate.

It looks like you are quoting from this article here.  https://cds.cern.ch/record/265047/files/P00024029.pdf

As you can see below, they explain why they are excluding the results you cut out and using a positive value below it.



*

Stash

  • Ethical Stash
  • 13398
  • I am car!
Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #387 on: July 12, 2020, 10:51:21 AM »
I keep the best stuff for my AFET.

The paper was posted on the CERN website, the best scientists in neutrino detection theory, one of the highest rated laboratories in the world.

They detected the tachyon (negative/imaginary mass). Confirmed by six standard deviations.

Yet, they dismissed this result, since they could not accept it.

More detail from Dr. Ehrlich’s work in detecting the existence of tachyons. His paper published last year called:

"Review of the Empirical Evidence for Superluminal Particles and the 3 + 3 Model of the Neutrino Masses"
Here’s a link to his page about all of this: https://ehrlich.physics.gmu.edu/index.php/books/
In his post about the paper, his book, and the KATRIN Experiments, he also includes a powerpoint for the less physics of minded folks. Here’s a link to that:
http://mason.gmu.edu/~rehrlich/Hunt_for_tachyon_pop.ppsx

Here’s a summary page from the powerpoint:

Hypothetical FTL particles (“tachyons”)   

- Tachyons are consistent with equations of relativity
- They can never slow down below speed of light
- Imaginary mass means as they lose energy the speed up!?!
- Light speed is a two-way barrier
- 3 classes of particles: tachyons, tardyons & luxons
- Tachyons looked for but not yet found
- Their existence is unknown – most physicists dubious
- Neutrinos are the only known possibility


From the same powerpoint a summary of what is happening now to confirm or deny the Dr’s hypothesis that Nuetrinos are tachyons:

My “3+3” tachyon model 
 
- In 2013 using data from SN 1987A I published a model claiming 3 neutrino masses one of which was a tachyon
- Very much against the conventional thinking
- Subsequently various kinds of evidence has been published in support of the model
- An experiment now underway at the Karlseruhe Institute of technology (KIT) known as KATRIN will pronounce the ultimate verdict


As it stands today, according to Dr. Ehrlich, the foremost expert in the field of FTL particles, Tachyons looked for but not yet found and their existence is unknown.

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 7049
Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #388 on: July 12, 2020, 10:52:05 AM »
They considered the findings as "unphysical".

They dismissed the clear proof of the muon neutrino being a tachyon.

A fact discovered and acknowledged by other top scientists who were dismayed at how the result was simply negated.

It's not the first time it happened.

Experiments with tritium beta spectrum also revealed negative/imaginary masses for neutrinos, again these results were dismissed.

This is why you do not have the tachyon the wikipedia list of particles that have been discovered.

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 7049
Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #389 on: July 12, 2020, 10:55:54 AM »
As it stands today, according to Dr. Ehrlich, the foremost expert in the field of FTL particles, Tachyons looked for but not yet found and their existence is unknown.

The muon neutrino/tritium beta spectrum experiments run in parallel with KATRIN, and are independent of other research carried out by tachyon scientists such as Dr. Robert Ehrlich.

Here is the absolute proof of the existence of the tachyon:



You are deliberately misrepresenting the paper by selectively quoting it. 

No, you numskull.

I already stated that the result was dismissed by the very scientists who did carry out this experiment.