No accelerator has ever solved any problem. They always raise more problems and those to solve which they were built are soon forgotten. This was stated by Nobelist Emilio Segre', whom I have personally known, in an article published on "Endeavor" magazine in 1972.
Tullio

---

Yea Tullio,
But the article is good because the guy who wrote the article can see things the same way i do. The guy who wrote the article knows full well that finding that Higgs-like particle solves nothing. He knows and i know that they are no closer to marrying atomic physics with Einstein's fairy tales, special and general relativity. Einstein's works of science fiction.

John.

---

Special and general relativity are part of our life. No experiment has proven them wrong. GPS would not work without them. Experiments are the litmus test of every theory.
Tullio

---

Special and general relativity are part of our life. No experiment has proven them wrong. GPS would not work without them. Experiments are the litmus test of every theory.
Tullio

There is a mistake in the GPS system Tullio. There is a mistake in the maths they are using to make their calculations for the GPS system. So they compensate for the mistake by kind of "adding in time" to make up for the time that appears to get lost.

You have read enough of my messages here Tullio. If you were clever, you would be able to find that mistake. Einstein's SR and GR are works of science fiction. You will find this out in time. Remember who told you this information Tullio!

John.

---

No particle accelerator would work without special relativity, including those used for tumor therapy. My daughter was working on the project of a medical accelerator using hadrons to cure cancer. The OPERA fiasco demonstrated once more that Einstein was right. I repeat, there is no experiment or observation that contradicts Einstein.
Tullio

---

Everyone should agree that Albert Einstein was a physicist who was very concerned about the subject or notion of time.

First he came up with the special theory of relativity in 1905, followed by the general theory of relativity of 1915.

Try to make an understanding of these subjects and you are very good at it.
Both of these theories are dealing with several different subjects which are thought to be related to each other.

If I am not wrong, he was not always that fond about the subject of quantum theory. Still, one might assume that time could be quantisized.

Time to me does to me not appear to be a constant on its own, but rather is a variable.

But perhaps I am wrong. Time may be viewed from one particular observers point of view. If someone is traveling at the speed of light for a long time, you end up returning back to the future.

Is time possibly related to its surroundings, like perhaps gravity?

Really, gravity makes time slow up. Therefore gravity relates to quantum theory. Some people think that gravity could be explained by means of waves.

Also quantum theory is related to particle physics. But gravity is thought to be a universal force.

Many years ago, I watched a television documentary about Albert Einstein and his work.

There were given some examples about how things would appear to an observer when traveling at the speed of light, or at least close to this speed. I do not remember the details, but things which look specific to us in ordinary life take quite another appearance when being observed from such a vantage point.

Perhaps Albert Einstein was trying to unify these theories within a single framework, starting with the concept of time?

In the end he was unsuccessful, because quantum theory did not go well with him.

Which means that unifying quantum physics with the subject of time is still one of the main problems.

Still, we are dealing with both the subject of gravity and time when it comes to the subject of quantum physics as well as quantum mechanics.

No particle accelerator would work without special relativity, including those used for tumour therapy.

You better explain that one Tullio. Exactly which specific part, or parts, of a particle accelerator would not work without special relativity?

My daughter was working on the project of a medical accelerator using hadrons to cure cancer.

Yea, so what? Whats the significance? Medics shot particles or radiation at tumorous cells to kill them. So what? It has nothing to do with special relativity?

The OPERA fiasco demonstrated once more that Einstein was right. I repeat, there is no experiment or observation that contradicts Einstein.
Tullio

The OPERA fiasco did NOT demonstrate anything other than the fact that scientists make mistakes! And thats the bit people should learn from that fiasco.

Let me help you to understand Tullio why that statement is wrong!

Tullio many many experiments do contradict special and general relativity!! Don't repeat the statement just because you heard other scientific people saying that. There are large contradictions in the scientific information we have.

One example is Black holes. Astronomers just love saying things like "special and general relativity elegantly explain how the universe works". But Tullio its not true. If you follow through the maths for black holes, the numbers don't work and the maths don't explain what happens to the matter that falls into the black hole. Special and general relativity maths would say that the matter that falls into the black hole just magically disappears into nothingness! The maths fail!

Tullio thats not science. Science is about explaining how things work. Matter disappearing into nothingness is not science and its not an elegant way to describe anything! Be rational here Tullio! Am i not making a good point here?

John.

---

MusicPlayer,
You made some good points there. In my opinion, your thinking along the right lines. If you actually did a few experiments yourself in your own home, you could make some real progress. You have the right idea, you just need some more research. Your thought process is better than most people!

John.

---

You better explain that one Tullio. Exactly which specific part, or parts, of a particle accelerator would not work without special relativity?
John.

The orbital mechanics. Since particles accelerated travel at speed comparable (but less) than the speed of light, you cannot use Newton mechanics to describe their orbits but you must use the Lorentz transformations, which are the basis of special relativity.
I do not know of any experiment that contradicts special relativity or general relativity. Please detail them.
Tullio
See Chapter 23, "The Motion of charged particle in electromagnetic fields" in W.Panofsky and L.Phillips, Classical electricity and magnetism.

---

You better explain that one Tullio. Exactly which specific part, or parts, of a particle accelerator would not work without special relativity?
John.

The orbital mechanics. Since particles accelerated travel at speed comparable (but less) than the speed of light, you cannot use Newton mechanics to describe their orbits but you must use the Lorentz transformations, which are the basis of special relativity.
I do not know of any experiment that contradicts special relativity or general relativity. Please detail them.
Tullio
See Chapter 23, "The Motion of charged particle in electromagnetic fields" in W.Panofsky and L.Phillips, Classical electricity and magnetism.

"orbital mechanics" Tullio??? What does that mean? Can you tell me exactly and precisely what "orbital mechanics" is used for in accelerator physics? And can you tell me who or why any physicist is trying to work out "orbits" of anything in the accelerator at CERN or any other accelerator?

Common Tullio, just admin it. There is nobody at CERN using special and general relativity for anything to do with the accelerators!!! Maybe they chat about it on their tea break. But its not used for accelerator physics.

I do not know of any experiment that contradicts special relativity or general relativity. Please detail them.

In my last post, i listed 1, black holes. And you didn't respond Tullio. Just as soon as you respond to what i said about the maths for black holes not working, then i will list a few more.

John.

---

There is a mistake in the GPS system Tullio. There is a mistake in the maths they are using to make their calculations for the GPS system. So they compensate for the mistake by kind of "adding in time" to make up for the time that appears to get lost.

Are we talking leap year seconds here?

Chris,
Are you for real buddy?

John.

---

No accelerator has ever solved any problem. They always raise more problems...

That is nicely paraphrased by Terry Pratchett (and others?) along the lines of how Science is an ever more detailed quest to continually expand further the horizon of ignorance.

That is, the more we discover, the better we can understand how much more there is yet to discover...


Keep searchin',
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

The OPERA fiasco did NOT demonstrate anything other than the fact that scientists make mistakes! And thats the bit people should learn from that fiasco.

No 'fiasco' at all for the Science. The fiasco was all to do with the sensationalist shallow vulture ignorant gutter media creating a cretinous fiasco in the media.

Meanwhile, the scientific method simply worked as always and Science progressed onwards.

Keep searchin',
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

You know, physicists are supposed to be brilliant scientists.

First, logical thinking, great ideas and theories sometimes comes up as a result from this, then experimenting with these ideas and later documenting the results which were being obtained from the original ideas and theories.

But where are they supposed to be putting their papers? Writing the numbers down on a blackboard (slowly becoming obsolete), or maybe being so clever as to rather write it down in more of an orderly fashion, possibly even storing it electronically.

Ask a physicist whether every aspect concerning every particle could be explained by means of mathematics, he or she probably would say no to this question.

The best with scientists, even when visible holes are apparent in their understanding of things, are their willingness at pursuing things even further. We are still a long way from a "Grand Unified Theory", but perhaps the work being carried out at CERN and other places will bring us to the point where we think we are having a general understanding of "everything".

guido.man,
Your the one that sounds like an evangelist.

We are discussing scientific topics here. If you have something scientific to contribute here, please do. This thread is about CERN and the LHC. Nobody mentioned anything about God except you guido.man

John.

---

I shall stop posting. I cited a book I have used in my thesis. Please read it as I have done.
Tullio
One of the authors of the book, W.Panofsky, was the director of the SLAC Linear Accelerator of Stanford University. He must have known something about accelerators.

---

... talking to god, mystical insight into the true workings of the universe, and generally carrying on like a televangelist, that it may be time to "put up or shut up". ...

I'm still hopeful for the book or writeup that is being promised. It's just got to be better than the various alien fantasy trash books.

Beyond Prometheus?...


Real or fantasy, there's some fun ideas there!

Keep searchin',
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

I'm still hopeful for the book or writeup that is being promised. It's just got to be better than the various alien fantasy trash books.

Beyond Prometheus?...


Real or fantasy, there's some fun ideas there!

Keep searchin',
Martin

Martin,
I've claimed many things here in the last year and a half. Many of the things i have claimed have been completely outrageous, mainly because i claim they are real, and that i myself made the discoveries.

Well this is whats going to happen, one of the following;

1. At some stage in the near future, i will publish a book outlining either my physics discoveries or a decoded section of the old book. Or both!

2. If i don't publish my physics discoveries, someone else will discover what i discovered and they will publish. This is also highly likely. If i sit still on my discovery for too long, someone will beat me too it! If someone is as determined as i am, they too will find the error in modern particle physics. You don't have to be a genius, you just have to be driven to find the answer. It took me about 3 year of searching.

Either way, the physics discoveries are going to become public in the near future.

3. "Them", the ancient people who came before us and gave us the books we know as the bible will return and they will announce both the discoveries i made, in effect, they will beat me too it. Because "they" know about the old book and the physics discovery. And i know that "they" know about both. And "they" know that i know. Its a bit complex to explain!

John.

---

I would also like to clarify something;

I have told many people here, in different threads, that i am bad at maths. And i will say it again, i'm really bad at maths!!

So some of you might wonder how i am making incredible discoveries in physics and astronomy when i'm so bad at maths?

This is the answer;

I'm an experimentalist! Its that simple! I have a nack of doing the maths very fast in my head, but i never write any of it down on paper. I have an uncanny ability to map out stuff in my head and memorise stuff.

All my life, since i was a young child, i built machines. Little machines, big machines, electric machines, electronic machines. And thats also what i have worked at all my life. I work on electric computer controlled machines. I build them, i fault find on them, i fix them. And i'm very good at it. This is my area of expertise in life, finding whats wrong with computer controlled machines when they stop.

So all the discoveries i have made are because i build machines and experiments to test stuff. I never bother with maths, unless i need to. I test everything to breaking point to find out how things work. If i don't believe something, i test it.

John.

---

Johnney,

Re 1: Is that in itself a prophesy?

Re 2: Such is the way of scientific or philosophical publication;

Re 3: Such is the nature of Science that it is repeatable, even across the years and across civilisations...


Go for it!

Keep searchin',
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)