REALTIVITY FINALLY DISQUALIFIED BY MAINSTREAM SCIENCE! BREAKING NEWS!

A proton with no electron is not an ion of anything it is a proton.

Keep going you are making less and less sense

how do you suppose stars are formed since we KNOW that hydrogen freed into space instantly disperses and does not have any tendency to 'clump'

Nope that is not "known" at all

So you are saying that neutrons make stars?

Here we are again with the "Where did the free neutrons come from?" problem

WRONG yet again. You're batting 1000.
[link to www.ehow.com]
Isolated Hydrogen Ion

A normal atom of hydrogen has one proton that has a positive charge and one electron that has a negative charge. It is the atom with the lowest atomic number and is the first element in the periodic table. Essentially, the hydrogen ion is comprised of a proton. For this reason, H+ is the customary way to represent a proton. The bare nucleus of the isolated hydrogen ion is able to bond and combine easily with electrons and other molecules. Because of the tendency of the hydrogen ion to bind to other particles, it can only exist as isolated hydrogen ions in the gaseous state or in a vacuum, where there are almost no other particles.

I beg your pardon!
All elements of the periodic chart stated out as hydrogen, and thorough the process of fusion they become heavier elements. Without neutrons this would not be possible. This is PROOF of intelligent engineering

I am glad you now posted that all your crap in the solar data thread about the proton band touching earth was crap.

And that also shows that your "proton detector" made out of a radio can't do anything because the protons can't make it to the surface.

You took that cast quite well

Where did the neutrons come from though?

A neutron IS MOST LIKELY a proton which has captured a slow electron and instead of the electron orbiting as in a normal hydrogen atom, is simple bonds directly to the Neutron and is seems as if it is one particle. (this is the most logical origin of neutrons Since an electron and a proton have equal and opposite charges, they would cancel each other and create a charge potential of zero.. This is PROBABLY why a neutron is slightly heavier than a proton by the exact mass of an electron. Again, this is THEORETICAL , but the evidence for it is compelling.

You might want to read up on it huh......

Look into quantum mechanics and you can stop posting logical fallacies and demanding people prove you wrong......you will be able to figure out you are wrong on your own.

I must admit it is more fun this way though

No thanks, I've already proves quantum mechanics is a fairy tale. Let's apply the laws of physics and Occams razor as realscience demands to the problem, shall we?

If I understand, your position is that the "strong force" is the true mechanism of events classically attributed to the "gravitational force."

If so, how do answer the criticism that the strong force is several orders of magnitude smaller than the force hitherto known as gravity, and, as such, would be insufficiently forceful to explain events attributed to gravity?

[link to en.wikipedia.org]

^^^^^^^This, yes! Good thread AA, "the photon is fairy dust"!!

I had it backwards. I should have said:

If I understand, your position is that the "strong force" is the true mechanism of events classically attributed to the "gravitational force."

If so, how do answer the criticism that the strong force is several orders of magnitude larger than the force hitherto known as gravity, and, as such, would be excessively forceful to explain events attributed to gravity?

There are particles from the sun reaching earth faster than the speed of light.

The video has not dis-proven anything it just simply states that the maths that we use are only approximation which had you really been an engineer you would grasp.

I find it funny that you use a theoretical physicist (you know the ones that make up crap)who gave up his own work because it fit your anti Einstein stance.

Kaiku went off the rails when his string theory turned out no better nor more accurate than relativity.

In that video you see that the end of the equation carried out equals infinity......we have a hard time attempting to imagine such a thing and maths freak out with such a non defined term.

He could of and should have offered the possibility that we inhabit an infinite universe but he failed to do so.

No there aren't

This is a very good question. Please allow me tine to respond, there is an answer but it is complicated

Yes. there are

neutrinos for one. Cosmic radiation reaches many times C

God is the creator and God is one. period. you are selling more BS on here, i see.

hey, jmho on your "spiel." you are anti-religious and anti-God.

there is no "divine trinity" in all the life on this earth.

you haven't even mentioned string theory or sound waves blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah

the Truth is humans do NOT know. God knows all. we just guess....instead of enjoying life.

Because you're a paranoid schizophrenic fruitcake and all of this is in your head?

Do you even consider that you are tipping your hand when you accuse someone of being a government shill? Because if by chance they are not, and just happen to be a regular old joe who thinks you're an egotistical, delusional tool, you are actually confirming to that person that you really are just another crazy freak on the Internet.

You see, from your perspective, I *may* be part of a vast conspiracy to marginalize you. But you'll never know, because you're missing the key facts of the situation and are forced to speculate on them.

Whereas whether you believe it or not, I KNOW FOR A FACT that I am not a shill or a part of a conspiracy to marginalize you, and that puts me up in the game. I know something you don't, and as a result the more you talk under the assumption that your speculation is fact, the more you reveal to me, and anyone else you falsely accuse, that you are in fact as crazy as a shithouse rat.

So since I know for a fact that you're crazy as a shithouse rat, that drops the validity of any of your theories by orders of magnitude.

And just so we're clear, you DID directly imply that I would die an untimely death for arguing against you. That was over a year ago. The Universe apparently deems me worthy of thriving, having provided me with a stable, well paying job, a wife, and kids, meanwhile it continues to curse you with mental illness and rob you of what you feel you deserve.

You are a failure, a lunatic, and the closest thing you'll ever come to success is convincing a few people on a conspiracy site that you're a scientific genius. And you're not even doing a very good job of that.

And other great thread by IDW. Yawn..............

You believe in a simplified explanation because the true implications are beyond your ability to grasp.

The waveform is potentiality interacting with reality. It is every possible trajectory the particle can take. Once observed, it collapses into a physical, quantifiable particle, and the trajectory the particle *did* take emerges into reality.

Wheeler was a true genius. But of course, since you can't comprehend his ideas and theories, you no doubt dismiss him as a hack.

Just what I was thinking - Best fun provider on GLP, even better than Wio and her photoshops.

NO, I recognize the fact that the apparatus is the only difference in the 'observed' and unobserved" double slit experiment, and it is what is most likely causing te difference in results, Occams razor and all.

But you are

You don't have to be a 'government' shill to be a shill. You could be shilling fr your religion.

Our relative intelligence imbalance is obvious though, and that's real relativity

[
A neutron IS MOST LIKELY a proton which has captured a slow electron and instead of the electron orbiting as in a normal hydrogen atom, it simply bonds directly to the Neutron and it seems as if it is one particle. (this is the most logical origin of neutrons Since an electron and a proton have equal and opposite charges, they would tend to be drawn together and if they did they would cancel each others' charges and create a charge potential of zero.. This is PROBABLY why a neutron is slightly heavier than a proton by the exact mass of an electron. Again, this is THEORETICAL , but the evidence for it is compelling.