New Physics Based on Yoon's Universal Atomic Model

newedana wrote:

Could you *please* try to get your attributions right?

And could you please tell me why you yet again ignored all my
questions for evidence and quantitative descriptions?


So mathematics is childish and primitive?
So Einstein invented all that stuff merely in order to cheat people?
He was a fraud?


Mathematics is very very honest so garbage in garbage out,

Interesting. Other crackpots keep saying that one get out anything of
maths that one wants.


and not
primitive and childish, but user's way of thinking for these two
physical events was chilish and primitive.

I asked you:
"What is "childish" and "primitive" about wave-particle dualism?"

Care to answer that?



Yes! But I dont think he intended to cheat people, but unfortunately
he resulted to cheat people with his childish idea.

I asked you:
"What is "childish" and "primitive" about wave-particle dualism?"

Care to answer that?


Dr,Yoon said in his
book it is not only these two case but also all the other principles
established by him are froudulent!

The principles he established are fraudulent, although he not intended
to cheat people?

Say, do you plan to make sense *ever*?



Bye,
Bjoern

In article .com,
"newedana" wrote:
Yeah, sure. Now this blowhard is elevating himself over Einstein?
Has he
no shame?

Why Is the Speed of Light Exactly C and Not Some Other Value?
« Older Messages 76 - 95 of 95 in topic - view as tree - 5
new
Guy Gordon Apr 26, 11:50 pm show options

You should refer newedana's reply for this question. I recommended to
the poster you never ask your question to QM man or particle physicists
who believe blindly A. Einstein's relativity theory.
We had a bad fixed prejudice, action only through a medium and medium
equals the mass. This traditional fixed idea seriously distorted the
science of undersanding the light and its propagation chracters. Light
is exactly the same as sound wave in propagating character.However, in
standard high school texts they deny this fact, light is entirely
different from sound wave. It is due to a strong influence of particle
physicists today who believe light is corpuscular photons. Sound wave
once released from its source propagates through the air phase with its
own speed that is nothing to do with the speed of its source. If the
source moves at some speeds there occurs the Doppler effect. Light is
exactly the same as acoustic waves, in terms of its propagating
character. Light pulse once emitted from its source propagates through
empty space at its own speed, and this speed is nothing to do with the
speed of its source. Thus there occurs the Doppler effect when the
source moves at some speeds. One cannot hear the steamwhistle affected
by the Doppler effect if one is in the same train. It is because the
elongated wavelength of steamwhistle due to Doppler effect turns out to
be restored to its initial dimensions when the one receives it in the
same train, because man runs with the same speed as the train does.
Light is exactly the same. If light source and the detector are on the
same coordinate system, or on the earth, one can measure always the
absolute speed of light, without any relation with the orbiting speed
of the earth. Elongated wavelength of light due to Doppler effect
becomes restored when the detector receives it, because the detector
receives the wave signal as it advances with the same speed as the
source, and vice versa. Albert Einstein didn't know this simple plain
truth. So he set forth the famous postulation for his special theory of
relativity; If a number of observer are moving at uniform velocity in
respect to each other and to a soure of light, and if each observer
measures the speed of the light emerging from the source, they will all
obtain the same value. The same value in his word means the absolute
speed of light from which speed of source is excluded. This is the very
evidence he didn't know how to remove the speed of source v from
additive formula, c=c'+ v, so he made his postulation c=c' when v
approach the speed c. Thus he proposed the general principle of
projectile mechanics expressed with a stupid equation: v=(v' + u
)/1+v'u/c^2, by borrowing the idea of Lorents space contraction. In
addition he announced that the speed of light is constant anywhere in
the cosmic space, because the light has the fastest speed of all
possible speeds in the nature, based on his equation,
m=m'/(1-v^2/c^2)^-1/2. Mass increases its absolute value as its speed
increases, so if the speed of mass approaches the speed of light its
acceleration can no more contribute to its speed increment. However
this is a fraudulent story if we accept that vacant space itself is
only the medium of light propagation. Because the vacant space is
absolutely uniform anywhere in this cosmic space, so the speed of light
has to have a constant speed. Then how can we explain the light
refraction taking place between different materials with different
optical density? I could learn this phenomenon in Dr.Yoon's
textbook(www.yoonsatom.net) The light section in his book clearly
explains the refraction phenomenon with a simple equation, involving no
speed factor, but containing wavelength of incident light, mass desity
factor, as well as incident angle of incoming light. He asserts that
light refraction can take place because the atomic nuclei in mass
system subdivides the incoming light wave into numerous micro beams
which develope into spherical waves, so the constructive interference
between them build a refractive light with a different running
direction. He also shows a number of schematical experiments of light
refraction, utilizing a large number of concentric half circles drawn
on two transparent films, and superimposing them. And he claims the
empty space itself is the only medium of light propagation, and element
particles building material system has nothing to do with this light
propagation. Although this assertion conflicts critically against the
traditional concept, it is quite correct. People today has been taught
that electrons building the material system serves to transmit the
light passing through material system. Feynman had also the same idea,
so he debates critically the Feynman's equation representing refractive
index, built based on his QEM theory, saying that it is a typical
example of cheating people with a fantastic mathematical trick. As one
knows as a plain truth, electric and magnetic force can act through
this empty vacant space without any aid of mass particles. He emphasis
in his book we have to abandon our old prejudice, action only through a
medium and medium equals the mass. Particle physicists believe that the
electric and magnetic force acting through this vacant space is due to
exchange of their energy grains traveling with their momentum, and
disregard the true mechanism of how these forces can act without
medium. This incorrect belief, mass system interferes the speed of
light is inherited from our science pioneer such as Fizeau who tried to
investigate in 1845, how does the speed of light change due to moving
speed of its medium, such as water. He mis-evaluated the light
interference occurred between two light beams, one running along the
flowing water and the other against that, as speed difference between
them. But it is quite incorrect! Imagine two rockets. One approaches
the earth and the other departs from the earth with the same speed. If
they emit lights with the same wavelength to a detector on the earth,
the detecot would receive two signals interfering with one another,
exactly the same as that Fizeau experienced in his experiment. Have
these two lights different speed? Absolutely no. They are exactly the
same. This is the reevaluation of Fizeau's experiment by Dr.Yoon.
newedana says based on Dr.Yoon's new physics.

..

Get back to me when any of these yahoos wins a Nobel Prize.

In article .com,
"newedana" wrote:
there is enough of them, gravity will do the job.

It appears you do not know both the gravitation and coulomb's law. If
you camculate the ratio of gravitation and repulsion acting between two
electrons using these two equations, the repulsion between them comes
out as 4.17x10^41 times as great as the gravitation. Do you still
believe these lightest atoms or molecules can gather automatically to a
place? All QM man believe like that way? Bha!


So where are you claiming great numbers of electrons aggregate?

Yeah, sure. Now this blowhard is elevating himself over Einstein?
Has he
no shame?

Why Is the Speed of Light Exactly C and Not Some Other Value?
=AB Older Messages 76 - 95 of 95 in topic - view as tree - 5
new
Guy Gordon Apr 26, 11:50 pm show options

You should refer newedana's reply for this question. I recommended to
the poster you never ask your question to QM man or particle physicists
who believe blindly A. Einstein's relativity theory.
We had a bad fixed prejudice, action only through a medium and medium
equals the mass. This traditional fixed idea seriously distorted the
science of undersanding the light and its propagation chracters. Light
is exactly the same as sound wave in propagating character.However, in
standard high school texts they deny this fact, light is entirely
different from sound wave. It is due to a strong influence of particle
physicists today who believe light is corpuscular photons. Sound wave
once released from its source propagates through the air phase with its
own speed that is nothing to do with the speed of its source. If the
source moves at some speeds there occurs the Doppler effect. Light is
exactly the same as acoustic waves, in terms of its propagating
character. Light pulse once emitted from its source propagates through
empty space at its own speed, and this speed is nothing to do with the
speed of its source. Thus there occurs the Doppler effect when the
source moves at some speeds. One cannot hear the steamwhistle affected
by the Doppler effect if one is in the same train. It is because the
elongated wavelength of steamwhistle due to Doppler effect turns out to
be restored to its initial dimensions when the one receives it in the
same train, because man runs with the same speed as the train does.
Light is exactly the same. If light source and the detector are on the
same coordinate system, or on the earth, one can measure always the
absolute speed of light, without any relation with the orbiting speed
of the earth. Elongated wavelength of light due to Doppler effect
becomes restored when the detector receives it, because the detector
receives the wave signal as it advances with the same speed as the
source, and vice versa. Albert Einstein didn't know this simple plain
truth. So he set forth the famous postulation for his special theory of
relativity; If a number of observer are moving at uniform velocity in
respect to each other and to a soure of light, and if each observer
measures the speed of the light emerging from the source, they will all
obtain the same value. The same value in his word means the absolute
speed of light from which speed of source is excluded. This is the very
evidence he didn't know how to remove the speed of source v from
additive formula, c=3Dc'+ v, so he made his postulation c=3Dc' when v
approach the speed c. Thus he proposed the general principle of
projectile mechanics expressed with a stupid equation: v=3D(v' + u
)/1+v'u/c^2, by borrowing the idea of Lorents space contraction. In
addition he announced that the speed of light is constant anywhere in
the cosmic space, because the light has the fastest speed of all
possible speeds in the nature, based on his equation,
m=3Dm'/(1-v^2/c^2)^-1/2. Mass increases its absolute value as its speed
increases, so if the speed of mass approaches the speed of light its
acceleration can no more contribute to its speed increment. However
this is a fraudulent story if we accept that vacant space itself is
only the medium of light propagation. Because the vacant space is
absolutely uniform anywhere in this cosmic space, so the speed of light
has to have a constant speed. Then how can we explain the light
refraction taking place between different materials with different
optical density? I could learn this phenomenon in Dr.Yoon's
textbook(www.yoonsatom.net) The light section in his book clearly
explains the refraction phenomenon with a simple equation, involving no
speed factor, but containing wavelength of incident light, mass desity
factor, as well as incident angle of incoming light. He asserts that
light refraction can take place because the atomic nuclei in mass
system subdivides the incoming light wave into numerous micro beams
which develope into spherical waves, so the constructive interference
between them build a refractive light with a different running
direction. He also shows a number of schematical experiments of light
refraction, utilizing a large number of concentric half circles drawn
on two transparent films, and superimposing them. And he claims the
empty space itself is the only medium of light propagation, and element
particles building material system has nothing to do with this light
propagation. Although this assertion conflicts critically against the
traditional concept, it is quite correct. People today has been taught
that electrons building the material system serves to transmit the
light passing through material system. Feynman had also the same idea,
so he debates critically the Feynman's equation representing refractive
index, built based on his QEM theory, saying that it is a typical
example of cheating people with a fantastic mathematical trick. As one
knows as a plain truth, electric and magnetic force can act through
this empty vacant space without any aid of mass particles. He emphasis
in his book we have to abandon our old prejudice, action only through a
medium and medium equals the mass. Particle physicists believe that the
electric and magnetic force acting through this vacant space is due to
exchange of their energy grains traveling with their momentum, and
disregard the true mechanism of how these forces can act without
medium. This incorrect belief, mass system interferes the speed of
light is inherited from our science pioneer such as Fizeau who tried to
investigate in 1845, how does the speed of light change due to moving
speed of its medium, such as water. He mis-evaluated the light
interference occurred between two light beams, one running along the
flowing water and the other against that, as speed difference between
them. But it is quite incorrect! Imagine two rockets. One approaches
the earth and the other departs from the earth with the same speed. If
they emit lights with the same wavelength to a detector on the earth,
the detecot would receive two signals interfering with one another,
exactly the same as that Fizeau experienced in his experiment. Have
these two lights different speed? Absolutely no. They are exactly the
same. This is the reevaluation of Fizeau's experiment by Dr.Yoon.
newedana says based on Dr.Yoon's new physics.=20
=20
..

there is enough of them, gravity will do the job.

It appears you do not know both the gravitation and coulomb's law. If
you camculate the ratio of gravitation and repulsion acting between two
electrons using these two equations, the repulsion between them comes
out as 4.17x10^41 times as great as the gravitation. Do you still
believe these lightest atoms or molecules can gather automatically to a
place? All QM man believe like that way? Bha!

Lloyd Parker wrote:

In article .com,
"newedana" wrote:

So mathematics is childish and primitive?
So Einstein invented all that stuff merely in order to cheat people?

He was a fraud?


Mathematics is very very honest so garbage in garbage out, and not

primitive and childish, but user's way of thinking for these two
physical events was chilish and primitive.


Yes! But I dont think he intended to cheat people, but unfortunately

he resulted to cheat people with his childish idea. Dr,Yoon said in his
book it is not only these two case but also all the other principles
established by him are froudulent! newedana says to Bjoen Feurbacher



Yeah, sure. Now this blowhard is elevating himself over Einstein? Has he
no shame?

All he has to do is create some tech that modern 'false science' says cannot be
done and he wins. Theories are ten a penny - practical replicable results are
priceless.

--
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

I haven't gotten the book as it's just too costly at $180 (maybe you
can
convince him to lower it to $25. I wonder how many here actually
bought the book..

A great number of people at present who bought his book, and the
numbe would increase limitlessly as years go. His book has no
postulation at all in explaining almost evergy field of natural
science. I sow he was laughing at main streme physicists, saying that
wild dogs bark to the moon because they do not know what is the moon.

I bought his book because his book will become a worldwide standard
textbook soon because it can surely contribute to give a fresh new idea
to those who work day and night for the development of their technology
almost in evergy field. I heard some news already from a researcher who
red his book got a great idea in improving the reproducibility of cold
fusion experiment. I believe this book deserves more than 180$ .
Allegedly statistical QM theory cannot attract technician's attension
because it produces a great deal of meaningless data inaplicable for
practical use. newedana wrote.

newedana wrote:
there is enough of them, gravity will do the job.

It appears you do not know both the gravitation and coulomb's law.

Suggestion: don't always search for the error on *my* side when you
disagree with something I wrote.


If you camculate the ratio of gravitation and repulsion acting between two
electrons using these two equations, the repulsion between them comes
out as 4.17x10^41 times as great as the gravitation.

Indeed. Your point? What has that to do with *atoms* coming together???


Do you still
believe these lightest atoms or molecules can gather automatically to a
place?

Indeed, they can, due to gravity. Hint: atoms are neutral. There is no
Coulomb repulsion between them.

Thanks for showing your complete ignorance of basic science, yet again.


All QM man believe like that way? Bha!

You should "Bha!" to yourself.


Bye,
Bjoern

newedana wrote:

[snip]


You should refer newedana's reply for this question. I recommended to
the poster you never ask your question to QM man or particle physicists
who believe blindly A. Einstein's relativity theory.

Liar. Physicists believe it because it agrees with the evidence.
That's the precise opposite of "blindly".


[snip rant]

Bye,
Bjoern

newedana wrote:
I haven't gotten the book as it's just too costly at $180 (maybe you
can
convince him to lower it to $25. I wonder how many here actually
bought the book..


A great number of people at present who bought his book,

How many of those actually understand physics?


and the numbe would increase limitlessly as years go.

Probably.


His book has no
postulation at all in explaining almost evergy field of natural
science.

Thanks, we have seen the level of his "explanations".

Other people call that "heaps of unsupported assertions, vague
handwavings and plainly wrong statements".


I sow he was laughing at main streme physicists, saying that
wild dogs bark to the moon because they do not know what is the moon.

And what makes him think that he is so much more intelligent that
all the hundreds of thousands of physicists?

And why does he apparently ignore about 99.9% of the available evidence?



I bought his book because his book will become a worldwide standard
textbook soon

In your dreams.


because it can surely contribute to give a fresh new idea
to those who work day and night for the development of their technology
almost in evergy field.

Why on earth do you think so?


I heard some news already from a researcher who
red his book got a great idea in improving the reproducibility of cold
fusion experiment.

ROTFL! Yes, that's a *great* example for the level of science in Dr.
Yoons book!


I believe this book deserves more than 180$.

And why do you think you are in the position to judge the validity of
this ideas?


Allegedly statistical QM theory cannot attract technician's attension
because it produces a great deal of meaningless data inaplicable for
practical use.

Maybe. You conveniently ignore that it *also* procudes at least as
much meaning*ful* data *applicable* for practical use.


Bye,
Bjoern