> Alright, I am in good shape for these last 100 or > less pages of New > Physics. Made many new discoveries
Do you mean your brilliant :
i)Links to Wikipedia
ii) References to 20+ year-old books
Neither is your work, neither is what anyone who is not a fraud (like yourself) would call reliable references. Nor is it work that belongs to you. So , on top of being a moron, you're taking credit for other people's work.
> but am lacking
Intelligence, honesty, any redeeming quality.
Go pretend somewhere else, you fraud, you fool no one.
of > one item that > bugs me. I am still obscure of the neutrino, and the > displacement > current. And I think the two are related. > > Picking up where I last dropped off on the neutrino. > I said this about > the neutrino: > > 1) it is pure energy and not a transverse wave but a > longitudinal wave > to carry away tiny excess energy > > 2) it maybe the medium in Space for other waves like > photons to travel > in; the aether so to speak > > 3) neutrinos relate to magnetic monopoles > > I need to make more progress on the neutrino in this > 5th edition. I > hate to face the 6th edition in the state of > condition now with > regards to the neutrino. > > But I think I can make that progress in these last > pages of New > Physics. > > Just yesterday I was talking of the primitive axiom > terms or concepts. > Surely the magnetic monopole has to be in the top ten > of primitive > terms of physics. > > Now one of the major drawbacks of neutrino is that > the particle rarely > interacts with matter and so the facts and character > and behavior of > neutrinos is a small pool of facts. > > But if we take the Maxwell Equations as the axiom set > over all of > physics, we have to ask the questions of the neutrino > from the point > of view of the Maxwell Equations. There are magnetic > monopoles in the > Symmetric Maxwell Equations. But is there anything to > the equations > that hints of neutrinos? Faraday said that the light > wave was a > disturbance in the Maxwell Equations, and so photons > are easily seen > as part and parcel of the equations but can we ever > discern neutrinos > from the Maxwell Equations? > > I think, and this is only a guess, that the > displacement current is a > aspect of neutrinos. > > And, I am going to make a speculative guess here, > that where > electricity is the perpendicular of magnetism, that > the neutrino > stands in a similar relationship to the photon. In > other words, the > neutrino is a form of the photon, but the major > difference is that the > photon is a double transverse wave while the neutrino > is a > longitudinal wave. If I am correct, then the neutrino > has the same > speed of light as does the photon and that the two > are not exactly > antiparticles of one another, but a duality > relationship and that > photons and neutrinos have no antiparticles. > > One would never say that the electricity is the > antiparticle of > magnetism, but rather they are duals. In the same > vain, the photon is > the dual of the neutrino. > > Now, what is meant by dual? I mean the photon is the > particle in > Euclidean geometry where you have +1 charge combined > with -1 charge to > make a 0 charge space. The neutrino is the particle > that occupies > NonEuclidean geometry. The neutrino occupies the > space of charge -1, > the electron or lepton space. > > Now, what brings me to these ideas that the neutrino > is the > perpendicular dual of the photon is the displacement > current in the > Maxwell Equations. It is there but seemingly having > no function, > purpose or meaning other than just there. > > Now there is a mathematics method, I discovered some > years back that > gives credence to what I am saying about neutrinos > being the > perpendicular of the photon, just as magnetism is the > perpendicular of > electricity. > > If you take the Descartes Coordinate System to task, > it is the system > for Euclidean geometry, where there are 4 quadrants > and where the > positive and negative are separated from one another. > In physics, we > do not have positive over in 2 quadrants and > negatives a world apart > in the other 2 quadrants. In physics, the positive > and negative are > close by one another so that the whole of the > universe is neutral or 0 > charge. > > So a few years back, I invented the AP Coordinate > System and it comes > in handy right here and right now. > > AP Coordinate System has just one quadrant, the first > quadrant. The > points are different from Cartesian points. The > points in AP, have > both a positive side to the point and a negative side > to the point. > The positive side is ahead in any direction from the > negative side. > > The reader can instantly recognize how the AP system > works by graphing > the sine or cosine function or the straightline > function y = x. > > The sine or cosine function graphed in AP Coordinate > System looks like > the cycloid function graph. Now I wish I had a upside > down U because > the cycloid would look like UUUU only upside down. > The next best thing is this symbol^ only with a > rounded top as ^^^^^^. > Or, better yet just look at the cycloid in Wikipedia. > > So when one makes a point in space in AP Coordinates, > each and every > point has a positive side to the point and a negative > side to the > point and that eliminates the need to have 4 > quadrants because all > graphs can be held in just one quadrant. > > In Cartesian coordinates, the graph of y = x is a 45 > degree angle > straight-line that cuts at the origin and extends > into the 3rd > quadrant. But in the AP system the graph of y = x is > just the 1st > quadrant only because negative numbers exist > alongside positive > numbers and not in their own separated cutoff realm. > > Now the AP system allows some equations to be > functions that the > Cartesian system never allowed. For example the > circle is not a > function in Cartesian but since it is half a circle > in AP system, the > circle is a function. > > So, what is the special meaning of the AP system? > Well, in Cartesian > coordinates, we have positives separated from > negatives and in the > Maxwell Equations, the double transverse wave is the > separation of > positive from negative. So that the sine or cosine > curves are photons, > but those are transverse waves. We want the > perpendicular of the > transverse wave which is the longitudinal wave. > > The longitudinal wave is derived as the perpendicular > of the > transverse wave if the points are combined positive > with negative > resting side by side. > > What I hope to achieve in these last pages of New > Physics is to show > that the neutrino is the photon as a duality > relationship, the same as > that the magnetism is the dual of electricity. And I > wish to show the > displacement current and magnetic current density is > the neutrino. It > means the neutrino has no rest mass, and it travels > at the speed of > light. > > Now if I am especially lucky, I think the neutrino is > the aether of > Space and it is magnetic monopoles that tile Space. > And that finally, > the entropy concept of 2nd law of thermodynamics that > says entropy is > steadily increasing, is simply the statement that the > Space of the > Atom Totality Universe is getting larger with time. > So that entropy is > a measure of neutrinos > increasing in number to form newer regions of Space. > > -- > > Google's archives are top-heavy in hate-spew from > search-engine- > bombing. Only Drexel's Math Forum has done a > excellent, simple and > fair archiving of AP posts for the past 15 years as > seen here: > > http://mathforum.org/kb/profile.jspa?userID=499986 > > Archimedes Plutonium > http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium > whole entire Universe is just one big atom > where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies