|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
principle of planetary rotation
"peter" wrote in message om... . PRINCIPLE OF PLANETARY ROTATION STATES when photons emitted from the sun enters planetary magnetic field on the side facing the sun, photons will be deflected by planetary magnetic field and absorbed at an angle on the planet surface the absorbsion of photons will generate attarction force between the planet and the sun due to inter-photon attraction of the radiated photons,the generated attraction force between the sun and the planet will than be resolved at an tangent to the point of absorbsion into rotational force of the planet by trigonometrical resolution of of resultant angle of photon absorbsion. PROPOSED BY PETER JULY/10/2003 THE PRINCIPLE IS SUPPORTED BY THE FOLLOWING 1)Right hand rule one (RHR1) True, although it does sound irrelevant. 2)Planetary magnetic field which radiate from (North pole to South pole),on planet side facing the sun. True, but magnetic fields are also radiated on planetd side not facing the sun. 3)Present of attraction force between photon radiated(Inter-photon attraction) False as to accepted theories and already available evidence. Do you have evidence that photons attract themselves ? 4)Fact that photon are emitted from the sun and absorbed on planet. True, trivially. 5)That photons are deflected by magnetic feild as they travel through the planet magnetic feild radiation from north to south.direction of deflection determine by RHR1. False, again as accepted theories and available evidence suggests. Do you have any evidence for your proposition ? For your theory to even be considered as possible (and there's still the open question of magnitude), you have to show current theories wrong on two (2) accounts, both that have both theoretical and experimental support. Do you have any evidence ? Clear Skies, Magnus |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
principle of planetary rotation
peter wrote:
wankage, trollage, loonage and dingbattery deleted The old "proof by repeated assertion" tactic. Didn't work in grade school, won't work here. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
principle of planetary rotation
The Commentator wrote in message ...
peter wrote: PRINCIPLE OF PLANETARY ROTATION wankage, trollage, loonage and dingbattery deleted Solvents are not your friend, Sparky. photon do have a positive charge as calculated it out to be about a positive value of 10^-62 C .Photon is not neutral as it is writern ..The extremly small charge and the extremly large velocity 3*10^8 makes it very deficult to measure under ordinary condition. your need a linear distance of 1000000 meters and deflecting voltage across deflecting plate of 2000000 volts. the principle based on the statement that photon are positivily charge disaproving that mean the all principle is disaproved,i have 20 evidence to support that photon are positivily charge at least i can defend my principle. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
principle of planetary rotation
"peter" wrote in message
om... The Commentator wrote in message ... peter wrote: PRINCIPLE OF PLANETARY ROTATION wankage, trollage, loonage and dingbattery deleted Solvents are not your friend, Sparky. photon do have a positive charge as calculated it out to be about a positive value of 10^-62 C .Photon is not neutral as it is writern .The extremly small charge and the extremly large velocity 3*10^8 makes it very deficult to measure under ordinary condition. your need a linear distance of 1000000 meters and deflecting voltage across deflecting plate of 2000000 volts. the principle based on the statement that photon are positivily charge disaproving that mean the all principle is disaproved,i have 20 evidence to support that photon are positivily charge at least i can defend my principle. How very silly of you. Why even bother to try to measure a single photon? If photons had a positive charge then a light bulb in a box would create a positively charged box. Conservation of charge says you're an idiot. Where's the created negative charge of the same magnitude but opposite sign when a photon is emitted? Charged particles, empirically without exception, are massed particles. To the very limits of experimental accuracy the photon's mass has been shown to be indistinguishible from zero. So where to now, Sparky? |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
principle of planetary rotation
"Greg Neill" wrote in message ...
"peter" wrote in message om... The Commentator wrote in message ... peter wrote: PRINCIPLE OF PLANETARY ROTATION wankage, trollage, loonage and dingbattery deleted Solvents are not your friend, Sparky. photon do have a positive charge as calculated it out to be about a positive value of 10^-62 C .Photon is not neutral as it is writern .The extremly small charge and the extremly large velocity 3*10^8 makes it very deficult to measure under ordinary condition. your need a linear distance of 1000000 meters and deflecting voltage across deflecting plate of 2000000 volts. the principle based on the statement that photon are positivily charge disaproving that mean the all principle is disaproved,i have 20 evidence to support that photon are positivily charge at least i can defend my principle. How very silly of you. Why even bother to try to measure a single photon? If photons had a positive charge then a light bulb in a box would create a positively charged box. Conservation of charge says you're an idiot. Where's the created negative charge of the same magnitude but opposite sign when a photon is emitted? Charged particles, empirically without exception, are massed particles. To the very limits of experimental accuracy the photon's mass has been shown to be indistinguishible from zero. So where to now, Sparky nature is very complet you have be able to consider many factor to understand photon + charge 10^-62 when absorb by an electron it reduces the electron -charge by 10^-62 hence the electron attraction force to the atom nucleus that why bohr said that electron jump to out orbit after absorbing photon. It very complex not way you think.if photon was not charge it would not be emitted by alternation of magnetic and electric field at right angle,if photon was not postive charge electron would not jump from inner orbit to outer orbit when photon are absorb. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
principle of planetary rotation
"peter" wrote in message
m... nature is very complet you have be able to consider many factor to understand photon + charge 10^-62 when absorb by an electron it reduces the electron -charge by 10^-62 hence the electron attraction force to the atom nucleus that why bohr said that electron jump to out orbit after absorbing photon. Show your mathematical derivation of the charge of a photon. In a previous post you alluded to it. Now compare (mathematically, if you please) the potential and kinetic energy difference that would obtain if an electron's charge were to be reduced by your specified amount with the actual potential and kinetic energy difference for different electron orbitals. It very complex not way you think.if photon was not charge it would not be emitted by alternation of magnetic and electric field at right angle,if photon was not postive charge electron would not jump from inner orbit to outer orbit when photon are absorb. Maxwell says you're wrong. The compton effect says you're wrong: http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/phys...tonEffect.html The photoelectric effect says you're wrong: http://theory.uwinnipeg.ca/physics/quant/node3.html Why, simple electron acceleration in a potential says you're wrong (the photons of the applied field would continuously reduce the charge, and hence the accleration, of the electron. You'd eventually end up with uncharged electrons). |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
principle of planetary rotation
(peter) wrote in message . com...
(peter) wrote in message . com... PRINCIPLE OF PLANETARY ROTATION STATES when photons emitted from the sun enters planetary magnetic field on the side facing the sun, photons will be deflected by planetary magnetic field and absorbed at an angle on the planet surface the absorbsion of photons will generate attarction force between the planet and the sun due to inter-photon attraction of the radiated photons,the generated attraction force between the sun and the planet will than be resolved at an tangent to the point of absorbsion into rotational force of the planet by trigonometrical resolution of of resultant angle of photon absorbsion. PROPOSED BY PETER JULY/10/2003 principle of planetary rotation is supported by the following 1)Right hand rule one (RHR1) 2)Planetary magnetic field which radiate from (North pole to South pole),on planet side facing the sun. 3)Present of attraction force between photon radiated(Inter-photon attraction) 4)Fact that photon are emitted from the sun and absorbed on planet. 5)That photons are deflected by magnetic feild as they travel through the planet magnetic feild radiation from north to south.direction of deflection determine by RHR1. I STUDIED BSC UP TO UNIVERSITY LEVEL I AM 26 YEAR OLD,WHO EVER WANT TO CONTRIBUTE SHOULD HAVE A MATURE UNDER STANDING OF SCI ,AS I SAID I DISCREDICT HALF OF PRESENT DAY SCI I HAVE 23 PAPER I HAVE WRITERN WHICH I HAVE NOT PUBLISH YET,ABOUT THE PRINCIPLE I PROPOSED I HAVE AN EXPERIMENT I HAVE CARRIED OUT,I TO CARRY OUT MORE TO CONFIRM MY RESULT,IT ONLY CARRIED OUT THE EQUATOR AND ONLY IN MARCH AND JULY |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
principle of planetary rotation
(peter) :
I STUDIED BSC UP TO UNIVERSITY LEVEL I AM 26 YEAR OLD,WHO EVER WANT TO CONTRIBUTE SHOULD HAVE A MATURE UNDER STANDING OF SCI ,AS I SAID I DISCREDICT HALF OF PRESENT DAY SCI I HAVE 23 PAPER I HAVE WRITERN WHICH I HAVE NOT PUBLISH YET,ABOUT THE PRINCIPLE I PROPOSED I HAVE AN EXPERIMENT I HAVE CARRIED OUT,I TO CARRY OUT MORE TO CONFIRM MY RESULT,IT ONLY CARRIED OUT THE EQUATOR AND ONLY IN MARCH AND JULY Gee, where did we hear this before? Okay, I bite. What University, date of grad, what courses. We can check that easy enough. Earl Colby Pottinger -- I make public email sent to me! Hydrogen Peroxide Rockets, OpenBeos, SerialTransfer 3.0, RAMDISK, BoatBuilding, DIY TabletPC. What happened to the time? http://webhome.idirect.com/~earlcp |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
principle of planetary rotation
"peter" wrote in message
om... I STUDIED BSC UP TO UNIVERSITY LEVEL I AM 26 YEAR OLD,WHO EVER WANT TO CONTRIBUTE SHOULD HAVE A MATURE UNDER STANDING OF SCI ,AS I SAID I DISCREDICT HALF OF PRESENT DAY SCI I HAVE 23 PAPER I HAVE WRITERN WHICH I HAVE NOT PUBLISH YET,ABOUT THE PRINCIPLE I PROPOSED I HAVE AN EXPERIMENT I HAVE CARRIED OUT,I TO CARRY OUT MORE TO CONFIRM MY RESULT,IT ONLY CARRIED OUT THE EQUATOR AND ONLY IN MARCH AND JULY Are your papers also misspelled, one run on sentence, and written in ALL CAPS? Must be fascinating reading. Did you, perchance, go to school with TJ Frazir or JP Turcaud? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Hans Moravec's Original Rotovator Paper | James Bowery | Policy | 0 | July 6th 04 07:45 AM |
Planetary Systems With Habitable Earths? | Rodney Kelp | Policy | 6 | April 2nd 04 02:32 PM |
Missing Link Sought in Planetary Evolution (SIRTF) | Ron Baalke | Science | 0 | October 20th 03 10:51 PM |
35th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference | Ron Baalke | Science | 0 | August 28th 03 08:29 PM |
NASA To Host Annual Planetary Sciences Meeting | Ron Baalke | Science | 0 | August 28th 03 07:25 PM |