General > General Technical Chat
"Veritasium" (YT) - "The Big Misconception About Electricity" ?
<< < (235/396) > >>
SandyCox:
Will you please explain how "new electricity" leads to the conclusion that a capacitor discharging into a transmission line leads to a step-like voltage?
adx:

--- Quote from: aetherist on February 16, 2022, 09:43:00 pm ---That Demjanov paper was not retracted by Demjanov, it was removed by the Journal. Hence it was not retracted, & they lied. So, u are supporting censorship, & a lie. And cheering it on.

--- End quote ---
Yet I was able to download it, and read it, so not censored. They merely offer their apologies for letting it slip through, without which we would not be discussing it. The journal did aetheriests (or whatever they are called) a service, you complain about the taking away of a part of something given in error, where's the lie?

I see your rational core bubbling up and causing these confusing surface vacillations in your logic. You sought evidence, it's your choice and I am merely observing an evolution towards imaginative rationalism. I don't want or expect you to abandon your ideas, but that does not preclude your journey to evidence-based thinking you clearly seek. Far be it from me to judge, but bravo.


--- Quote from: aetherist on February 16, 2022, 09:43:00 pm ---Leapfrogging electons were the first electons that i thought of in Dec 2021. Shortly after, i realized that simple hugging must be the answer, no hopping. If the screw-thread X does not show the extra delay due to the simple extra distance then that would falsify my electons. And i don’t see how roo-tons could come to the rescue. Roo-tons would fail just as Beaty's silly leapfrogging em radiation must fail to rescue old (electron) electricity from the elephant in the room.

--- End quote ---
Ok but leapfrogging is due to someone else you said. If the "X" fails to support your electon theory then on one-strike rules you will be forced to invoke your roo-tons, you said. Why? If roo-tons would also likely fail as you now claim then that is effectively a prehumous admission of failure for your revised theory. You set up a false dilemma, by denying any possibility to revise your theory, by speculatively revising your theory into a form that would also fail. But that doesn't prevent you from seizing an opportunity. You have previously used the device which I expect you would again invoke upon failure of the experiment (which your rational core might have determined is quite likely): "I don’t agree that roo-tons explain this null result. But perhaps they could. Blah blah de blah ...". You have actively sought out this situation which has doomed you to fail then come to your own transparently ridiculous rescue, yet you chose a forum where you know you can get called up on this issue after all these years. Welcome.


--- Quote from: aetherist on February 16, 2022, 09:43:00 pm ---Forum members around here seem to be unaware that it is almost impossible to prove something, especially a subatomic something. But it is of course possible to disprove something. Anyhow, it is easy for me to say that there is no proof for electrons & photons, because there will always be good alternative theories that fit the facts. Many scientists don’t believe in electrons & photons. Or, putting it another way, if u designed a page full of yes/no questions re electrons (or photons), the chances are that no 2 scientists in the whole world would tick the same boxes exactly.

--- End quote ---
It is impossible to disprove anything. It is merely a quicker path to the same false certainty one gets from 'proof' through absence of evidence - tipping the balance of probability quicker. There is no certainty, only belief. A composite of conscious hope and subconscious fear. Any belief I have in electrons and photons is therefore optional. I am not against alternative theories. Your comment about the quiz is probably true.


--- Quote from: aetherist on February 16, 2022, 09:43:00 pm ---Forum members seem to be unaware that Einstein contradicted Einstein. His ideas changed right up to his death. Einstein would disagree with much of modern (supposedly Einsteinian) science. And modern science disagrees with much of Einstein.
Einstein would be thrilled by my electons.

--- End quote ---
That may all be true, or at least not wildly untrue. But I was thrilled by your roo-tons. Does any of this particularly matter?


--- Quote from: aetherist on February 16, 2022, 09:43:00 pm ---We have facts & we have hot air.  I came here & i have tried to point the way to replace hot air with facts.

--- End quote ---
And it's working. Refer to your rational core.


--- Quote from: aetherist on February 16, 2022, 09:43:00 pm ---Can any members here use old electricity to explain the traces for the AlphaPhoenix X pt1 & (later) pt2?

--- End quote ---
Once again, this explanation is in this thread way back - the answer is yes. The Maxwell simulation (or even all of them) replicates the features seen in the measurement I think better than expected given the problems with 'X' technique. The only thing I found 'interesting' is the "subtle lift", in both. I didn't quite go to town on the scope screenshot to the degree you have, but I did pore over it for a time not to treat it as some kind of smorgasbord of  Dunning-Krugeresque intrigue but because I use scopes and know what to look for. You are ignoring the fact pointed out in one of my first replies to you that the result of the measurement matches the Maxwellian simulator's output, confirming the theory for that particular case, which is what you question, resulting in the answer "yes" which is a simple word with a stable meaning and unlikely to be confusing unlike this unnecessarily long sentence which you have no problem understanding. Ask your rational core, it asked the question.


--- Quote from: aetherist on February 16, 2022, 09:43:00 pm ---When someone does the screw-thread X, will old (electron) electricity explain that?

--- End quote ---
Yes.

But you already suspect it might - that's why you are here and asking the question.


--- Quote from: aetherist on February 16, 2022, 09:43:00 pm ---My new (electon) electricity might explain (we will see).

--- End quote ---
It won't. You will sidestep it as described above, which you know full well because you have it planned.

But that's not the point. Nor are your reasons for being here, really.

Given that it is impossible to disprove anything, what if despite all your pushing and tests which (say) leave your theory in tatters, it turns out to be correct in large part ~100 years from now? We just didn't test it right. All this would undoubtedly have happened, leaving a mark on history weirder than Tesla's, but how could it in any way affect the validity of a theory years from now?
TimFox:
An example of the physical reality of the Fitzgerald contraction is in the details of "undulators" in producing synchrotron radiation.
http://photon-science.desy.de/research/studentsteaching/primers/synchrotron_radiation/index_eng.html
There was a young fencer named Fisk
Whose speed was exceedingly brisk.
So fast was his action
That the Fitzgerald contraction
Reduced his rapier to a disk.
(Assuming, of course, that the thrust of the rapier was along its long direction.)
adx:
If interested in the physical nature of electrons, a few weeks back (something to do with this thread) I saw a "photo" (it says) in the following article of chemical bonds:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_bond
also
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_cloud_densitometry

I thought it unusual to be referred to in this way, an actual photo or direct image of the electron cloud, but that is what it is, and times are such that this is possible. I thought I had browsed the entire web such is the strength of my procrastinatory force, but looks like I'll have to start again. It can wait till tomorrow.
eugene:

--- Quote from: adx on February 17, 2022, 04:00:25 pm ---https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_cloud_densitometry

--- End quote ---

Rudenite is especially photogenic.
Navigation
Message Index
Next page
Previous page
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...

Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod