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

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.

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.

"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?

"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.

"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).

(peter) :

It very complex not way you think.

And that is why I know you are wrong. Science has the goal of looking for
the simplest answer to any question. People who look for complex answers
where simple one already exist are just trying to boost thier ego.

Earl Colby Pottinger

PS. I still have not seen a single line of math from you.

--
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

(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

(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

"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?