Pretending Subquarks actually exist!

  • 483 Replies
  • 12630 Views
Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #450 on: July 17, 2020, 06:11:33 PM »
122.9382-76.1253/68.1104+57.0099*47.5924*73.2832-81.3398 = 198875.241144

47.5924-76.1253+81.3398/68.1104*57.0099/122.9382+73.2832/47.5924+76.1253/81.3398-68.1104-57.0099+122.9382*73.2832 = 8858.6809997


In order to walk upright like a human, you must give up monkeying around.

That's not an algorithm: a repeatable sequence of logical operations.

I use the same algorithm for each zeta zero.

A huge difference.

pleas show the algorithm I have yet to see it : all I have seen is a list of numbers. how did you get the numbers?
show something like the algorithm ( a + b) / c = x : the algorithm in use  ( 10 + 40 ) / 2 = 25.
just one set of numbers will do.
The the universe has no obligation to makes sense to you.
The earth is a globe.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #451 on: July 17, 2020, 06:56:44 PM »
It’s all just an irrelevant smokescreen. His list of numbers are meaningless just as his claims that subquarks exist. In fact as I have said before it fits into his pattern of claiming things that are not true.

He claimed he invented and made a perpetual motion machine.
He claimed Covid-19 was not a virus
He claimed gravitons had been discovered
He claimed subquarks had been discovered
He claimed ancient Egyptians turned lead into gold

Etc etc.... Sandokhan has a track record of just making things up!
It goes further! Sandokhan reads a lot on the 0ccult :o and seems to believe in it.
We know that Tycho Brahe was an astrologer (part of his paid job) and Isaac Newton also believed in the occult and hypothesized that it might be connected with gravitation's apparent "action" at a distance.

But alchemistry and the occult were just part of science of those days with Newton marking a transition to "modern science".

Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #452 on: July 18, 2020, 12:37:34 AM »
Quote
He claimed he invented and made a perpetual motion machine.

Can you please show thread where it happend?

*

Timeisup

  • 1593
Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #453 on: July 18, 2020, 02:15:07 AM »
Quote
He claimed he invented and made a perpetual motion machine.

Can you please show thread where it happend?

Why don’t you get it from the horse’s mouth, go ask Sandokhan, it was him who claimed to have designed and built such a machine.

Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #454 on: August 11, 2020, 08:17:19 AM »
Sandokhan says that "negative mass" is what matters
And like I pointed out he doesn't understand the difference between negative mass and imaginary mass.

The sources he clings to do not claim a negative mass.
They say negative mass squared. That means an imaginary mass.
Book said so. Do i need to make red srcle pointing where?
Here, let me help:


Wait. I am sorry. It seems you are right. It says mass squared. So it isn't anything new?

Also, sandokhan has few other papers on his dispoisal.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2269599#msg2269599

Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #455 on: August 11, 2020, 03:09:58 PM »
Also, sandokhan has few other papers on his dispoisal.
And how many actually support his claims?

He is good at finding papers to pretend that his claims are justified, but he has much more difficulty with finding those that actually support his claim.

*

NotSoSkeptical

  • 6531
  • Flatness as in the shape of a water droplet.
Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #456 on: August 11, 2020, 04:32:33 PM »
Ah, so I see we are back to this topic.

Subquarks are hypothetical.  Meaning they exist only in theory.  There is no proof that they exist outside of that theory.
Rabinoz RIP

Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #457 on: November 25, 2020, 09:25:52 AM »
Quote
He claimed he invented and made a perpetual motion machine.

Can you please show thread where it happend?

Why don’t you get it from the horse’s mouth, go ask Sandokhan, it was him who claimed to have designed and built such a machine.

Or maybie he quoted someone who said he made it?

Also, here and in many other debates globe side pointed sandokhan linking papers which don't quite support his claims. But here, he linked paper which didn't support his claims just to show what math it used!

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=87190.msg2284740#msg2284740

P.S maybie scientists who published graviton and subquark findings got blackmailed and supressed so ther findings don't become famous.
« Last Edit: November 25, 2020, 09:30:15 AM by Code-Beta1234 »

*

Stash

  • 7299
Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #458 on: November 25, 2020, 10:25:25 AM »
Quote
He claimed he invented and made a perpetual motion machine.

Can you please show thread where it happend?

Why don’t you get it from the horse’s mouth, go ask Sandokhan, it was him who claimed to have designed and built such a machine.

Or maybie he quoted someone who said he made it?

Also, here and in many other debates globe side pointed sandokhan linking papers which don't quite support his claims. But here, he linked paper which didn't support his claims just to show what math it used!

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=87190.msg2284740#msg2284740

P.S maybie scientists who published graviton and subquark findings got blackmailed and supressed so ther findings don't become famous.

pps, maybe that is a completely made up statement and makes no sense.

Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #459 on: November 25, 2020, 12:51:22 PM »
P.S maybie scientists who published graviton and subquark findings got blackmailed and supressed so ther findings don't become famous.
There are a few quite big issues with that:
1 - What is the motivation? Absolutely none.
2 - Some other scientist would then likely discoverer it and release it anyway.
3 - Why allow all the research on it in the first place then?

Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #460 on: November 25, 2020, 03:34:53 PM »
P.S maybie scientists who published graviton and subquark findings got blackmailed and supressed so ther findings don't become famous.
There are a few quite big issues with that:
1 - What is the motivation? Absolutely none.
2 - Some other scientist would then likely discoverer it and release it anyway.
3 - Why allow all the research on it in the first place then?

Assuming sandokhan is right

1. To hide flat Earth. Sandokhan claimed (probably) that this proves something else which whoud prove FE.

2. It will too be supressed. I belive he showed that happen althrought this might be wrong.It was talking about 20' and 30' and Einstein or something. I searched but i found nothing :-\

3. You can't just ban entire field of research. Supressing individual papers tho..

Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #461 on: November 25, 2020, 03:36:11 PM »
Quote
He claimed he invented and made a perpetual motion machine.

Can you please show thread where it happend?

Why don’t you get it from the horse’s mouth, go ask Sandokhan, it was him who claimed to have designed and built such a machine.

Or maybie he quoted someone who said he made it?

Also, here and in many other debates globe side pointed sandokhan linking papers which don't quite support his claims. But here, he linked paper which didn't support his claims just to show what math it used!

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=87190.msg2284740#msg2284740

P.S maybie scientists who published graviton and subquark findings got blackmailed and supressed so ther findings don't become famous.

pps, maybe that is a completely made up statement and makes no sense.

Focus on probability that most of debunks of sandokhan might be focused on wrong papers!

Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #462 on: November 25, 2020, 03:51:24 PM »
Assuming sandokhan is right
1. To hide flat Earth. Sandokhan claimed (probably) that this proves something else which whoud prove FE.
That just pushes the problem back. Why hide the FE?
And separately, why couldn't they just include that in RE. As has been pointed out plenty of times to him, none of his nonsense to replace gravity actually relies upon a FE. Subquarks existing or not is irrelevant to the RE, it has no bearing on the shape. Gravitons are somewhat expected by mainstream science. So they would fit just fine with a RE and thus are not proof of a FE.

2. It will too be supressed. I belive he showed that happen althrought this might be wrong.It was talking about 20' and 30' and Einstein or something. I searched but i found nothing :-\
Considering how much gets out, you can't completely suppress anything.

3. You can't just ban entire field of research. Supressing individual papers tho..
And this contradicts 2. Either you can suppress it all, or you can't.
If you can, you can suppress the entire field. If you can't manage to supress the entire field, the results will eventually get out.

Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #463 on: November 25, 2020, 10:55:05 PM »
Papers will get out, but they will not become famous like Einstein's did.

And "why hide FE" was one of most discussed parts of theory. You can find answer in other threads.

*

Stash

  • 7299
Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #464 on: November 25, 2020, 11:58:20 PM »
Quote
He claimed he invented and made a perpetual motion machine.

Can you please show thread where it happend?

Why don’t you get it from the horse’s mouth, go ask Sandokhan, it was him who claimed to have designed and built such a machine.

Or maybie he quoted someone who said he made it?

Also, here and in many other debates globe side pointed sandokhan linking papers which don't quite support his claims. But here, he linked paper which didn't support his claims just to show what math it used!

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=87190.msg2284740#msg2284740

P.S maybie scientists who published graviton and subquark findings got blackmailed and supressed so ther findings don't become famous.

pps, maybe that is a completely made up statement and makes no sense.

Focus on probability that most of debunks of sandokhan might be focused on wrong papers!

Focus on the probability that most of the debunks of Sandokahn are debunks. If you'd like to de-debunk, have at it. Otherwise, what point are you trying to make?

Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #465 on: November 26, 2020, 12:06:26 AM »
Quote
He claimed he invented and made a perpetual motion machine.

Can you please show thread where it happend?

Why don’t you get it from the horse’s mouth, go ask Sandokhan, it was him who claimed to have designed and built such a machine.

Or maybie he quoted someone who said he made it?

Also, here and in many other debates globe side pointed sandokhan linking papers which don't quite support his claims. But here, he linked paper which didn't support his claims just to show what math it used!

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=87190.msg2284740#msg2284740

P.S maybie scientists who published graviton and subquark findings got blackmailed and supressed so ther findings don't become famous.

pps, maybe that is a completely made up statement and makes no sense.

Focus on probability that most of debunks of sandokhan might be focused on wrong papers!

Focus on the probability that most of the debunks of Sandokahn are debunks. If you'd like to de-debunk, have at it. Otherwise, what point are you trying to make?

That maybie all contradictions you pointed in various threads are just him qouting paper to show wrong way pf doing it. Check link i provided to see situation. You were there. He made no way to show that he linked it to show wrong math. Maybie he did that with some other papers.

*

Stash

  • 7299
Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #466 on: November 26, 2020, 01:09:07 AM »
Quote
He claimed he invented and made a perpetual motion machine.

Can you please show thread where it happend?

Why don’t you get it from the horse’s mouth, go ask Sandokhan, it was him who claimed to have designed and built such a machine.

Or maybie he quoted someone who said he made it?

Also, here and in many other debates globe side pointed sandokhan linking papers which don't quite support his claims. But here, he linked paper which didn't support his claims just to show what math it used!

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=87190.msg2284740#msg2284740

P.S maybie scientists who published graviton and subquark findings got blackmailed and supressed so ther findings don't become famous.

pps, maybe that is a completely made up statement and makes no sense.

Focus on probability that most of debunks of sandokhan might be focused on wrong papers!

Focus on the probability that most of the debunks of Sandokahn are debunks. If you'd like to de-debunk, have at it. Otherwise, what point are you trying to make?

That maybie all contradictions you pointed in various threads are just him qouting paper to show wrong way pf doing it. Check link i provided to see situation. You were there. He made no way to show that he linked it to show wrong math. Maybie he did that with some other papers.

I checked the link. I still don't know what point it is you are trying to make. Like I said, if you'd like to point out something specifically that you call into question, then do it. What exactly is the issue? Be specific. Hyper specific.

Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #467 on: November 26, 2020, 01:49:12 AM »
Papers will get out, but they will not become famous like Einstein's did.
If it was something that big, they would.
The only way to prevent that if instead it was a very larger group all working together. Then the group/facility gets famous.

e.g. Plenty people know about LIGO, but I couldn't tell you the names of the head scientists.

And "why hide FE" was one of most discussed parts of theory. You can find answer in other threads.
You mean the most deflected. No justifiable answer was ever provided.

Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #468 on: November 26, 2020, 09:45:01 AM »
On my local state-sponsored TV channel there is a TV-Host type of show. So anyways host invided relativly famous medical expert here. So they talked about Covid-19 (it was back in May-June) and he mentioned that some Russian/Chiese scientists published some paper few decades ago talking about some medical stuff.  Decade later US scientists published paper talking about same thing in same way previous ones did. They got attention. He found old paper on accident. This proves that papers don't all jave same chance of getting famous. Now, as far as I noticed sandokhan linled sereval Russians and eastern Europeans. It seems that Aether is popular there. And story above proved papers form "East" have less chance to become famous!


I can think of:
Georgi Mayklin and Yuri Gallaev and Vesselin Petkov. He linked more but i don't remember (maybie "Klauber" but i am not sure he is Russian)

Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #469 on: November 26, 2020, 09:48:43 AM »
On beginning of this thread sandokhan posted news article

https://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/44784

Commenter said
Quote
3. An advanced knowledge of Quantum Gravity indicated in 1995, quarks and *quarkels would be found to comprise of the electric particle energy of gravity photons. Robert Wood-Smith (RWS) discussed this with Albert Mantiziba who, in July 1995 and with indirect help from Max Planck, established:-
the proton comprised of 2.2674 x 10^23 gravity photons:
the neutron comprised of 2.2705 x 10^23 " "
the electron comprised of 1.2349 x 10^20 " " .
These combine to form respectively the quarks of the proton and neutron, and the quarkels of the electron.

[*Quarkels: the term is applied by the Partners to the components of the electron: which RWS predicted in 1994/95, together with their values. Note. The 1998 Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded to three scientists for their discovery of "quasiparticles" that carry an impossible amount of charge: the reference was to the fractional charges of the electron.]

4. 'Science' magazine in February 1996 reported - American researchers have said, they found that collisions between quarks in a particle accelerator were unexpectedly violent. William Carithers, of Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, in Batavia, Illinois, told 'Science': “This is just the sort of effect you would see if quarks were not fundamental particles, but had some sort of internal structure.”

5. Chris Hill, theorist at Fermilab, indicated the view in “New Scientist” | 11 May 1996 | page 29 | “It would suggest that whatever lies inside the quarks is incredibly tightly bound, in a way that theory can’t yet accommodate.” On the 1st March 1997 - in an article in 'New Scientist' on page 14 - results from DESY, the German Electron Synchrotron pointed to the existence of what is described as a “leptoquark”. Robin Marshall of the University of Manchester, who was involved in the work, said “The leptoquark is a bizarre object that we don’t understand completely”. Researchers said this “could mean that quarks and leptons are not fundamental particles after all, but are made up of even smaller particles”.

6. We have indicated in our reports: Fermilab had discovered in reality the long sought after gravity photons: i.e. the true fundamental photon.

7. There is much more we are in a position to convey (fully corroborated by some of the most prestigious research organizations known to the scientific community). By invitation, we will be only too pleased to provide knowledge 'beyond the Standard Model', which will be of value and interest to the scientific community.

Robert G. Wood-Smith.
Consultant: Advanced Nuclear Physics.
Nuclear Physics (Medicine).
Radiation-induced Genomic Instability.

Associate Partners (Medical Division):
H. Rosalie Bertell Ph.D. Environmental Epidemiologist.
Malcolm Hooper Ph.D., B.Pharm., C.Chem., MRIC,
Emeritus Professor of Medicinal Chemistry.

This might be relevant. Thoughs?

*

Stash

  • 7299
Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #470 on: November 26, 2020, 10:10:02 AM »
On beginning of this thread sandokhan posted news article

https://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/44784

Link is bad.

This might be relevant. Thoughs?

Relevant to what?



Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #472 on: December 05, 2020, 05:58:37 AM »
You don't actualy need to supress individuals. If you supress sponsors secret will stay hidden, and it does require less people and smaller chance of whistleblowers.

Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #473 on: December 09, 2020, 05:05:16 AM »
Going back to Dr. Ehrlich papers and website.

He posted theoretical papers implying exsistance of tachyons. But there maybie is other explenation for that. He still needs KATRIN results to be prove them.

*

Timeisup

  • 1593
Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #474 on: December 11, 2020, 09:35:10 PM »
Going back to Dr. Ehrlich papers and website.

He posted theoretical papers implying exsistance of tachyons. But there maybie is other explenation for that. He still needs KATRIN results to be prove them.

The bottom line is, no matter how you wish to spin it, subquarks have never been demonstrated to exist. The only plausible way to prove it either way is by using a collider such as the one at CERN. To date they have found no conclusive evidence. This makes any reference to subquarks or gravitons, for that matter, null and void as no experiment yet conducted show that they exist. It’s as simple as that.

*

faded mike

  • 1949
  • new world tattoo drill scar+++++++I'm thinkin flat
Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #475 on: December 12, 2020, 10:07:43 PM »
I can't believe the first page - you really think this is the place to say that? You socalled debunkers.
" Using our vast surveillance system, we've uncovered revolutionary new information..."
           -them

I am not a druggy

*

faded mike

  • 1949
  • new world tattoo drill scar+++++++I'm thinkin flat
Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #476 on: December 12, 2020, 10:10:51 PM »
I've only read the first few pages of Sandokhans, but I have a feeling the depalma experiment and many others like it have not been adequately adressed in the mainstream - i think Sandokhan has the inside scoop.
" Using our vast surveillance system, we've uncovered revolutionary new information..."
           -them

I am not a druggy

*

Timeisup

  • 1593
Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #477 on: December 15, 2020, 01:10:11 AM »
I've only read the first few pages of Sandokhans, but I have a feeling the depalma experiment and many others like it have not been adequately adressed in the mainstream - i think Sandokhan has the inside scoop.

This is interesting. You choose to believe Sandokhan while the published experimental facts say the opposite. How can someone have an opinion on an area of science that requires the most specialised tools to investigate it. You have touched on a significant way of thinking that has become very prevalent; the presumed right to have an opinion on any subject and demand that opinion to be as valid as any other.
This way of thinking, endemic amongst flat earth advocates, opens the door to the growth of ignorance and chaos. Why bother with education when we could all make up our own reality. This is why flat earth supporters claim the education system is corrupt to legitimise ignorance.

Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #478 on: December 15, 2020, 01:59:25 AM »
I've only read the first few pages of Sandokhans, but I have a feeling the depalma experiment and many others like it have not been adequately adressed in the mainstream - i think Sandokhan has the inside scoop.
The Depalma experiment is just an extremely poorly controlled experiment which shows nothing at all.

Re: Pretending Subquarks actually exist!
« Reply #479 on: December 15, 2020, 11:44:31 PM »
I can't believe the first page - you really think this is the place to say that? You socalled debunkers.

What? Are you talking about timeisup's "agressive debunking"