CERN Neutrino speed vs SLAC E158 data

Will politics hide a major discovery in Science?

Discussions on astrology, homeopathy and superstition etc.

Moderators: Calilasseia, DarthHelmet86, Onyx8

CERN Neutrino speed vs SLAC E158 data

#1  Postby John Hendry » Feb 24, 2012 8:12 pm

Hay Skeptics!

No time to write but EW said it about as good as I could to keep this simple and the discovery on top of the table. :popcorn:

Hi John, (and others)
I saw your blog regarding CERN's neutrino speed and thought you'd want to know calculations using Stanford's SLAC E158 data on the asymmetry of the weak force were posted by amateur physicist John F. Hendry on Nature's Forum after the CERN September announcement showing each step taken in adding the weak force asymmetry time/space gained in 453.6 miles explaining CERN's v-c/c=2.58e5 neutrino speed. This “added space” is the breakthrough that physics (and Einstein) sorely needed but for Hendry and his friends in the music field the data correlation was not an accidental discovery and the breakthrough happened years ago. Stanford’s SLAC E158 team’s data causing this measurable gain was announced by Hendry years before CERN’s “impossible announcement” and is the reason his response using SLAC’s “unrelated” E158 data was immediate.

The information showing CERN's neutrino v-c/c=2.58e5 @ 453.6 mile gain is a product of weak force asymmetry was posted years ago using SLAC’s E158 data to correct the slight error detected in Newton’s law and went unnoticed outside the music tech community. After CERN’s announcement Mr. Hendry showed the asymmetry value of the weak force applied to E=mc2 (as well as F=ma) which unlike Newton’s Law had no reported error outside of his own claim until CERN showed its effect happening. It’s posted on several other science related forums as well found by Googling "John Hendry neutrino". Mr. Hendry’s claim is also supported by the quantum mechanical behavior of evanescent modes. As you may already know, frustrated total internal reflection (FTIR) using double prisms has clearly revealed quantum mechanical tunneling and “virtual particles” are needed for describing interaction processes where “imaginary” and “not really real” virtual photons predicted by QED calculations are used to fill in the gaps created. This “added space/time” is real and the “imaginary” mathematical placement holding term being used to hold time has been replaced by a real and measurable additional phase in time needed to transfer energy not understood by physics until Real Relativity Theory which the top sound techs had no problem accepting since it “made sense” of time. UFT research grew into DNA research and later resulted in a New Circle of Fifths (while working on the DNA’s gene ensemble’s “circle”) where tonal space is placed relative to time, AND a second phase or direction of time (replacing imaginary time and numbers) relative to Mass oscillation is added to show phase and allow all the sharp and flat notes to fit into the wheel in correct order. This second inertial frame based phase direction towards ‘home’ gives gravity dominance as the initial state force and shows force moving from a higher pressure well to a lower, whereas electron flow is opposite despite common sense with most conventional texts reversing it in the direction of the lower pressure well due to it’s reverse phase direction. Hendry’s E=m+{a}c2 based model is derived from an algebraic particle wave (time) producing clock equation powered by the weak force’s reverse quantum gravity phase separating quantum gravity from cosmological gravity by it’s opposite anti-particle phase and the neutrino’s added space. The equation is built out of known symmetries rearranged by a mechanical function of phase with the needed asymmetry properly placed to transfer E and is exceptionally simple once you realize when Mass oscillates it does the “Moon Dance” to move forward, and due to time dilation the matter in the universe exists in a state of almost frozen time @3.6 seconds a year dilation from looking at Mass in oscillation creating a speed of light clock running slightly fast. It’s initially as controversial as it gets because the UFT equation adds the graviton as a 4th phase/part to the atom and demonstrates that space itself is the force carrier of non-quantum gravity we observe, and Mass is its own force carrier of quantum gravity. When the anti-graviton’s “hole” oscillation phase is active (E returning), the electron’s oscillation (atomic) phase is going up (E doing work and dissipating) with the weak force separated from the strong force by the weak force’s asymmetry neutrino space transferring the photon’s energy at the speed of light adding that tiny distance that adds up with time as shown in other experiments as well.

In 1949 Sommerfeld pointed out that the FTIR tunneling optical phenomenon represents the analogy of quantum mechanical tunneling and in 2007 armed with modern measurements the August New Scientist quoted G. Nimtz and A. A. Stahlhofen as saying that this barrier is crossed in zero time at superluminal tunneling velocity and therefore the evanescent modes of tunneling are disobeying Einstein’s special theory of relativity, or “lie outside the bounds of STR”. They demonstrated this by showing the photons of a light beam crossing the open prisms or “tunnel” did not add the required time needed to cover this “magic” distance at the speed of light. Here, as with CERN’s neutrino speed, we see the laws of relativity again being “broken” without accounting for the weak force asymmetry time gained. Unfortunately you will also see Hendry’s research time and money over the past 12 years has been consumed by a criminal case involving an HOA lawsuit instead of building his home and workshop needed to conduct his own experiments. You can’t hide public records and it’s about time something was done about HOA’s beyond Court gag orders to hide the truth of what goes on with these “legal entities” so hopefully this discovery will draw attention to what stopped the research of the only person to come forward who understands the need and function of the neutrino and the space/time associated with photonic tunneling. The Esaki diode (semiconductor tunnel) has been in use since 1962 but the particle barrier penetration time was not yet determined nor explained outside of “parasitic time consuming electronic interaction effects in a semiconductor”. Now the barrier time is known thanks to SLAC’s E158 team of experts showing in 453.6 miles 2.48e-5 (CERN’s same result) is added to the speed of light with a .20 comma as predicted by Hendry as well as part of Cohan and Glasgow’s VSR theory.

Adding the WFA gain to Mass oscillating at the speed of light (a speed of light clock) reveals constant time dilation as well as asymmetry is added and in effect “at normal walking speed” due to observing the weak force running fast (SOL-SOL=WFASY gain). Hendry is pointing out that we are observing a speed of light clock (creating anti-particle Mass oscillation phase locations) from another frame of reference where our clock has not stopped completely due to the added time. So anti-particle Mass oscillation formation phases are short lived, and the space created is replaced by mass potential energy and the particle wave point space/field created remains permanent building up with time. Isometry, like rests in a music composition, is in effect between observers showing no two observers are simultaneous connecting E to observation by giving the observer Mass. CERN’s neutrino speed is showing we live in a Universe constructed of time dilation where we only observe 3.6 seconds tic by each year. The addition of the neutrino’s space needed to transfer the photons energy has added time to a physical Universe in the direction of the arrow of time with so little movement the trail of an atom’s particle phases (wave) leaves a solid impression shown real by it’s 4 phases of force in phase with the atom’s formation (and the photon), and on the other side/direction of Mass oscillation where quantum gravity’s return reverse arrow cannot grow longer but the clock phase keeps spinning adding gravity a black hole forms with both sides interacting in perpetual interlocking phases of force placing the Observer in the middle feeling the effect. I don’t think the HOA attorneys that robbed Hendry after a 9 year legal battle will obtain the usual silence they expect if SLAC’s E158 data matches CERN’s data because E=m+{a}c2. Surprisingly no one has commented on or disputed Hendry’s addition to mathematics (Einstein’s Comma) on Nature’s forum, certainly the place to do so with CERN workers posting their comments and math to correct CERN’s “error” before Hendry’s announcement, especially since the tiny asymmetry value of the weak force matches CERN’s data against such incredibly high odds of chance and creates a new cosmological constant of obvious effect that Hendry uses to build a model of the 4 Mass oscillating (weak force) particle phases of force creating time as well as holding atoms together, which are not what they appear to be and wave theory explains why.

Unless they decide to try to keep Hendry’s discovery top secret which will be hard to do with the cat out of the bag making so much noise the requirement for the experts needed to announce the shocking data correlation is to not look less informed than an amateur and the wait to catch up and understand the matching data (as well as quantum tunneling) is creating a silence with zero press coverage of the discovery of Hendry’s work that revealed the CERN neutrino/SLAC E158 data relationship. The math is straight forward and Hendry has been citing the cause of the weak force asymmetry and importance of the photon/neutrino energy transfer space using SLAC’s E158 data for years. Fortunately CERN handed Hendry a worldwide press event in physics of the highest caliber of importance based on a simple straight line and known value discrepancy to prove E=m+{a}c2) as well as F=m+{a}a making 2.48e-5 a very important number to remember by its match with SLAC’s E158 data. It’s now probably the most important number in the history of Physics. To grasp this just imagine how far in distance light travels in one thousand years…..now add the relatively small but still vast distance compared to 453.6 miles that light travels in one hour to the thousand year speed of light distance. Now calculate using Hendry’s calculations posted the weak force asymmetry distance gained in 453.6 miles and you have 2.48e-5 showing CERN’s neutrino gain in v is an exact match with Stanford’s SLAC E158 weak force asymmetry t gain creating a .20e-5 harmonic wave comma showing a greater value of 2.68e-5 in the measured asymmetry of a second reverse arrow (anti-graviton phase) of space exactly as Hendry’s theory predicted producing further evidence neutrinos oscillate and Hendry’s claim is correct and accurate. It also supports elements of Cohan and Glasgow’s VSR showing space has a slight measurable asymmetry at this scale just as they claim. Hendry’s addition and confinement of Mass within the weak force connects the Observer to the Universe of forces as a critical part: Mass. Plain and simple, on and off, John Hendry has shown Mass and the point of observation (force) are one and the same on the quantum scale and the weight of Mass, it’s potential energy to oscillate, determines the length of oscillation and explains exactly what time is while exposing the Mass based nature of consciousness and goes far past VSR’s errors.

Due to Stanford's SLAC team's E158 discovery of the weak force asymmetry using a 1000 year speed of light clock measurement to add the one hour asymmetry time gained it has an accuracy advantage over CERN’s data based on only 453.6 miles and places CERN’s data responsible for the final figure responsible for what Hendry named “Einstein’s Comma” in correcting E=mc2. This is not a lose cable as ABC announced recently after Hendry’s data circulated for almost 4 months undisputed by scientists and comments using the math only supported Hendry’s finding. The odds of both CERN and SLAC’s sets of data reaching the same exact "error" in 453.6 miles (2.48e-5) within CERN’s stated limit of error without the direct relationship Hendry pointed out is highly, highly unlikely, and to produce the predicted harmonic oscillation comma correctly shows how accurate both sets of data are and makes it obvious Hendry’s prediction over the years is responsible when you consider he knew exactly what data to use to show cause and effect and we are seeing with neutrinos @ v-c/c=2.48e5 in need of explanation that SLAC’s data matches exactly within CERN’s limit of error.

This relationship stated for years came about by needing the weak force asymmetry value revealed to Hendry by an equation he (and others) claim is the real deal fit on a t-shirt UFT equation of 4 forces working together to create the first atom out of time/energy he posted online years ago before finding SLAC’s E158 data to fill in the needed gap with Google caching saving some of its history. The UFT equation’s track record is impressive if it is answering the biggest question brought forward in physics yet. And this is only one event that has left a track record such as this. Hendry claims (without dispute again and with 100% agreement from those that have seen it awaiting potential patenting issues beyond copyright law) he created a New Circle of Fifths while working on the DNA’s Gene Ensemble’s Summery trying to “cheat” by copying the math over using it. If so that is something impossible to fake as it’s the spine of harmonic music theory. Hendry states assigning tonal space to time made room for all the key signatures to fit and be included in the motion of real time. He says the incomplete original Circle of Fifths worked because it has always relied on the proper Mass oscillation phase cycle of the graviton called the “hole” found opposite the electron in modern books on electricity of imaginary nature except to those in the field that argue which one is moving, the electron or the hole. Stanford’s SLAC E158 team’s data has inadvertently confirmed Hendry’s claims made in the years gone by as well as CERN’s neutrino speed through simple math anyone with a calculator can do revealing the relationship in the three prier unrelated sets of data answering the past questions of quantum tunneling . If Hendry is correct space is the force carrier of gravity. It’s as if the graviton (or “hole” named for a reason) is the spaced formed when you put your finger (the anti-electron’s mass) into clay and create space the size of your finger as you pull it out. No space outside of space is a strange concept till you add time and Mass to see how they go together.

This indeed changes physics by someone who is not a mathematician but in needing to communicate is introducing a new system of mathematics replacing “imaginary time” and the “imaginary” concept used with a second (real) reverse clock phase of Mass oscillation time representing a second reverse arrow of space. The experts seeing Hendry’s posts were silenced claiming CERN in error not expecting such a finding related to the weak force and I think when this gets around the laymen not worried about their “expert” reputation will get it out when Hendry posts the new standard model. I think politics are choking this discovery. Even if it was a coincidence we should have heard something about it when you consider the tremendous distance light travels in a thousand years verse one hour ratio and then section out only 453.6 miles to add the tiny asymmetry value of the weak force to it. At these odds against chance it’s the topic of the Century. Add all the support for Hendry’s correction from 1949 when Sommerfeld pointed out that the FTIR tunneling optical phenomenon represents the analogy of quantum mechanical tunneling to 2007 with G. Nimtz and A. A. Stahlhofen’s data supporting many other measurement claims of the Goos-Hanchen shift that also suggests that tunneling beams travel with superluminal group velocity showing evanescent modes of tunneling are disobeying Einstein’s special theory of relativity too and it’s quite clear there is no coincidence and Einstein’s theory of Special Relativity is safe with the needed correction of adding the weak force asymmetry space gained. Based on the standard of odds against chance science is built on CERN’s findings are correct and the gain in time was caused by the asymmetry of the weak force, and this is what adds the space needed for all the other similar claims made going back to 1947. Science is indeed slow as it waits for the next person of problem solving abilities to come along and take physics to the next level. I’m not waiting for someone to have to tell me what caused CERN’s data because it is now obvious to anyone paying attention to this situation of profound change to the Standard Model.

All put together the undisputable known facts clearly show the neutrino does not exceed the speed of light in adding space/time to the weak force Mass oscillation rate cycle we observe running slightly fast as Stanford’s SLAC’s E158 data shows: it adds it at the speed of light in transferring E as an individual unit of measurement that occupies space and changes force carrier in atomic phase relative to inertial frame based timings as Mass acts as a pendulum generating the weak force from two opposite moment arms of force and direction relative to the oscillation phase of the physical Mass of the observer. This explains the physical based cause of time based on the weight of the Observer fundamental to effects of force we experience through chemistry and neurology to see the World as it is, not freely “imagined” as some mystics think. Our minds may play tricks on us, but time is real and it measures real motion of real objects. Non-relative “real” time is back bringing space with it and a true inertial frame of reference sought after in the “either” before giving up the search. Real time is needed for measuring motion to apply it’s concept to space, reversing the concept of the void of space being applied to time. Einstein had the symmetry of time backwards because he left out a needed part of the clock in relativity: the Observer’s Mass acting as a pendulum. No two observers made out of E can exist at the same exact time allowing time and space to change the view between observers ending many paradoxes.

E.W. Higgs
John Hendry
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: John F. Hendry
Posts: 9
Male

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: CERN Neutrino speed vs SLAC E158 data

#2  Postby Spearthrower » Feb 26, 2012 9:27 am

Or it's just a measurement error.
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
Spearthrower
 
Posts: 21866
Age: 41
Male

Country: Thailand
Print view this post

Re: CERN Neutrino speed vs SLAC E158 data

#3  Postby Zwaarddijk » Feb 26, 2012 10:50 am

It reads like something written by a crackpot. If it isn't, it needs rewriting until it reads like a serious attempt at science.
Zwaarddijk
 
Posts: 4319
Male

Country: Finland
Finland (fi)
Print view this post

Re: CERN Neutrino speed vs SLAC E158 data

#4  Postby John P. M. » Feb 26, 2012 11:21 am

What happens on the internet, stays on the internet:

E. W. Higgs:
http://www.keyboardforums.com/e-w-higgs-here-t1911.html
http://rc.runryder.com/helicopter/t562621p5/ (scroll down to E W Higgs' post)

John Hendry:
http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110922/ ... t-id-27540
CERN's announcement followed another incredible announcement by the University of Washington that was made: the AIDs virus DNA family code that the experts had spent over a decade trying to crack was solved by amateur online gamers playing "Foldit" in only three weeks. Now when an amateur says something like Consciousness has Mass found in the DNA's Gene Ensemble Instance Summery locations it might get a little more attention.

It's been the sound techs and musicians that understand the w t separation and time dilation created, not the physicists I sent the UFT off to, too busy to take the time to look despite it being rather obvious.

(it seems direct linking didn't work; it's post #27540 below the article)
User avatar
John P. M.
RS Donator
 
Posts: 2913
Male

Country: Norway
Norway (no)
Print view this post

Re: CERN Neutrino speed vs SLAC E158 data

#5  Postby Jumbo » Feb 28, 2012 2:20 am

Zwaarddijk wrote:It reads like something written by a crackpot. If it isn't, it needs rewriting until it reads like a serious attempt at science.

It does seem like word soup.

There is some serious mixing up of physical terms and weird phrases like 'weight of mass'.

The other thing that leaps out is the only equation presented:
Hendry’s E=m+{a}c2 based model


Is it just me or is this dimensionally incorrect?
The Feynman Problem-Solving Algorithm

1. Write down the problem.
2. Think very hard.
3. Write down the answer.
User avatar
Jumbo
 
Posts: 3599
Age: 38
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: CERN Neutrino speed vs SLAC E158 data

#6  Postby twistor59 » Feb 28, 2012 7:31 am

Non-relative “real” time is back bringing space with it and a true inertial frame of reference sought after in the “either” before giving up the search


That's it ! Michelson and Morley were looking for the wrong thing - if they'd looked for either they'd have spotted it.

=>Pseudoscience in 3....2....1.......

Edit. Oh I see it's already there. FTL evidence for sure. No topic can move that fast......
A soul in tension that's learning to fly
Condition grounded but determined to try
Can't keep my eyes from the circling skies
Tongue-tied and twisted just an earthbound misfit, I
User avatar
twistor59
RS Donator
 
Posts: 4962
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: CERN Neutrino speed vs SLAC E158 data

#7  Postby Jehannum » Feb 28, 2012 10:11 am

This guy's total.
Extraordinary claims require ordinary evidence.
User avatar
Jehannum
 
Name: Peter
Posts: 250
Age: 46
Male

Country: England
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: CERN Neutrino speed vs SLAC E158 data

#8  Postby John Hendry » Mar 18, 2012 5:26 pm

"The other thing that leaps out is the only equation presented:" Only? It's a big "only".

What that "only" means is E=m+{a}c2 outside the weak force where E=mc2 inside it because the original equation does not include the photon’s force carrier space the neutrino provides to exit the weak force to the strong force. This changes physics far more that E=mc2 did due to the infrastructure in place to take advantage of the energy tap {a} provides. It does bring back time in sync with Newton's time but armed with E=mc2 corrected showing space is relative to real inertial frame of reference time "either" way you look at it as well as correcting the known error in Newton's law by adding the second reverse phase in time held by "imaginary" numbers in physics that never add up correct without {a} added to expose the second "real" phase in time and deal with weak force asymmetry.

It also means The Great Professor was right: there are no dice and {a} adds the cosmological constant needed to balance "H". So get out a bottle of aspirin and have fun with this equation he hated (now fixed) some of you have likely seen before to show the application of {a} in another equation that is now two equations to deal with entropy that requires an arrow exposing the graviton's second reverse arrow of "space". But remember we are dealing with concepts built out of time so you can't have two sides of one concept at the same exact time. You can't put up where down goes, or movement (velocity) with non-movement (position). But since you can't have nothing (no Observer) without something (the Observer, Mass) to create the concept of nothing this logic creates an arrow to put a concept in an "information frame" whereas one side will tell you the other side. God plays cards to say "I Am" and slip us a new card in the middle of saying it.

Low to high entropy, E=h+{a-lesser diesis}c/wavelength.
High to low entropy, E=h+{a}c/wavelength. The lesser diesis is named Einstein's comma, but here it's Maxwell's Demon and it cannot be in two places at the same time/size. Nor can it ever be the the same size relative (in ratio) to time.

BTW, EW did a good job explaining {a} on most points, it's long but not sure what your point is. Mass, gravity, weight holds a simple concept of force relative to time and two directions. Time is the key here due to Mass oscillation that I assure you is not defined correctly in any physics book yet dealing with matter of atomic "weights", not the terms used in theories: " What happens on the internet, stays on the internet." I would add what you see until they or Nature turns it off after collecting information and not take it for granted. I think its a dangerous idea so excuse no new rocket motor equations, just enough to "enlighten" people through understanding the math process and let a few people learn putting out fear and hate only creates hate coming back through a weak link through their blind side and that's not how you disarm the World. History shows brute force and the rampant corruption and greed associated we see controlling money is always short term power, and the people that misuse power ALWAYS think they are the exception and look at the mess they made this time. It's really added up. It's easy enough to control people using their own free will but I agree population control and basic intelligence must go together or war and genocide will decide the numbers. But that's Nature at it's worst and {a} changes what is on the table now big time. It is the only thing that will save the rich from themselves trying to trump Nature. It's a tap for energy that's lets us in-between quantum states into time's reservoir, the strong force. Generate 120 watts on a bike generator for 2 seconds (two coulombs) and split the field in half and reverse it so it repels itself. Now notice you have a force of almost one million tons at a distance of a meter, not mm. So how do you do that? You understand that the weak force is created by Mass in oscillation and how {a} works. And one more thing....never ever put two new field generation magnets in you front pockets or even the same room. http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hb ... lefor.html

CERN's neutrinos @[color=#CC0000][b] v-c/c=2.48e-5[/b][/color] sec gain in 453.6 miles = SLAC E158 wf asy gain @[color=#CC0000][b] 2.48e-5[/b][/color] in 453.6 miles w/.20e-5 comma, not a loose cable. Pass it around....it changes physics but not the politics of money and power...LOL. Give them the magnets but don't say anything.

Check this out: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/physics/fa ... osmos.html
"But surprising new clues are emerging that everything, you and I, and even space, itself, may actually be a kind of hologram. That is: everything we see and experience, everything we call our familiar three-dimensional reality, may be a projection of information that's stored on a thin, distant two-dimensional surface, sort of the way the information for this hologram is stored on this thin piece of plastic."

LEONARD SUSSKIND: "This is a real disconnect, and it's very hard to get your head around: modern ideas, coming from black holes, tell us that reality is two-dimensional, that the three-dimensional world, the full-bodied three-dimensional world, is a kind of image of a hologram on the boundary on the region of space."

S. JAMES GATES, JR.: "This is a very strange thing. When I was a younger physicist I would have thought any physicist who said that was absolutely crazy." Read what the brain researchers are saying but realize a filter needs real source material and the Universe is our guts.

If you notice I said years ago it takes two WF Mass oscillation cycles to create one 3D "instance" location of an Observer's C/G in the Gene Ensemble. There's a machine somewhere around here and it runs off a computer....Do, Re, Me....it sounds as it feels. Now note the missing black key and reverse phase in "sense" but not real time. Real time makes the wall real so don't let this go to your head.....the loop will give you a headache;-)

"This guy's total." LOL! Thanks..... How could EW be right about something this big unless people say I'm wrong as it's my work quoted? It's not like they are going to understand it if it held off so many for so long......at first. But when they do watch them say how smart they are after being given the answer they couldn't figure out. Did you know Albert Einstein was an Old Fuddy Duddy? A 19th Century thinker? No *hit. It was on the Science Channel. The guy was a complete idiot! UFT Equation...right. So easy to believe your own BS and see the reflection. An atom oscillates and ANYTHING that oscillates has 4 phases in time except a cart with two axles and 3 wheels. Despite impressive accomplishments, that's how much physics knows about time, and time is the key to space.

John^^
John Hendry
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: John F. Hendry
Posts: 9
Male

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: CERN Neutrino speed vs SLAC E158 data

#9  Postby John Hendry » Oct 03, 2017 7:09 am

Time has a moment arm that hides gravity's tiny force by looking very large sitting close to what amounts to a fulcrum when measured by time, and it increases with time to expose the truth found in just about anything making lies increasingly hard to hide over time even without an Internet resulting in the old wise tale "time tells all". And it's now been over 5 yrs since my last post here on March 18, 2012... so after learning there is such a thing as the SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, originally called the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, I wonder how many rational minds noticed what time had to say next...:scratch:

After showing SLAC's E158 weak force asymmetry ratio matched CERN/OPERA's shocking Sept 2011 worldwide announcement by creating an asymmetry in time of 0.20e-5 sec... which added a 4th oscillation phase (graviton) to the atom and a 2nd reverse arrow to time by exposing the missing "too small to see" graviton was actually a reverse oscillation phase in space connected to time misnamed the "hole" shown opposite the electron right where it should be :clap: SLAC in need of a window to confirm the asymmetry in time exposed went back over their 9 year BaBar experiment data and "looking at it differently" :coffee: discovered it was there all along.

SLAC reported the confirmation time has asymmetry in the Journal Physical Review Letters on November 19, 2012 and gave the discovery what is called a 14-sigma level of certainty -- which is "far more than needed to declare a discovery". Showing that time has what some are calling a "preferred direction" on the quantum scale simply shows that time has an arrow that follows space in the process of Mass oscillation. And in layman terms the change in physics involving time is rather simple as it shows when we look at light we are looking at a speed of light clock generate the light... which as obvious as that is with the weak force lighting up the Sun time dilation connecting gravity to time was a very big pill to swallow. It corrects the analogy in relativity that said if the observer looks at a speed of light clock time would stop and introduces constant ratio "real" time dilation based on the asymmetry of the weak force and changes E=mc2 to E=(m{a})c2 and allows the fine structure constant to be understood: (e{a})/t=E.

John P.M. said:
"What happens on the internet, stays on the internet". I wish... http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110922/ ... t-id-27540

If that were true I'd be able to show you a physicist that said I got space and time mixed up in trying to separate their measurement to support his way of thinking. To think politics of power connected to the flow of money will leave what they don't want seen on the Internet is not being Rational or Skeptical and right now that's what we all need to be in our actions and thoughts...
John Hendry
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: John F. Hendry
Posts: 9
Male

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: CERN Neutrino speed vs SLAC E158 data

#10  Postby DavidMcC » Oct 03, 2017 3:21 pm

Here endeth the word salad (I hope).
May The Voice be with you!
DavidMcC
 
Name: David McCulloch
Posts: 14519
Age: 64
Male

Country: United Kigdom
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: CERN Neutrino speed vs SLAC E158 data

#11  Postby John Hendry » Oct 17, 2017 3:11 pm

Read your own posts and replies... you have over 14,000 of them here at almost 8 per day vs my 5 posts in the last 6 years that come up on Google connected to various physics topics which I why I decided to come back here and see why. This is obviously where you express your opinions (mostly philosophy) as fact and dismiss anything outside your own opinions you hang on to as fact... without presenting anything concrete such as an experiment or better some simple basic math to back up saying something using a universal language everything is based on.

If you noticed my posts are first and foremost based on using basic math and some simple basic algebra to show something spectacular yet very basic and relatively simple that outside of empty (baseless) hit and run posts like yours exposing little more than how you feel to react with emotion in the form of an insult, stands 100% undisputed despite being very controversial by changing basic understandings in physics and correcting a famous analogy on time dilation.

In fact using the proven fact space is connected to time and pointing out related obvious known facts that went blindly unnoticed I added the missing 4th oscillation phase of the graviton misnamed the hole shown opposite the electron to the atom, and in doing that also added a second reverse arrow to time needed to support an oscillation in space connected to time. Now that's hard to argue with and because logic was used and put in place the change allowed gravity on the atomic scale to be understood by simply pointing out that just as the neutron measures bigger than the proton, the graviton phase (path) measures larger than the electron phase (path) and the difference in size (length) added to the reverse oscillation phase is the cause of gravity acting as a real force connected to the observer's own center of gravity... rather than describing gravity using it's complex spacetime geometry looking at the big picture "at the same time" spread out over 13.8 billion years.

And my last post here referenced further confirmation by SLAC that has not only not been disputed, but copied and used to support other related observations in physics. So honestly the emotional response calling mathematics and associated descriptions "word soup" coming from you is to be expected. How is (e{a})/t=E word soup? That's just like saying V=IR or F=ma is word soup. And what's sad is in briefly reading your posts on Freewill you agree with what I've shown but you are way too lazy to think it out and prefer to hear yourself talk rather than try to comprehend what I said and you justify it to maintain your chemical based symmetry with an insult.
John Hendry
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: John F. Hendry
Posts: 9
Male

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: CERN Neutrino speed vs SLAC E158 data

#12  Postby theropod » Oct 17, 2017 3:23 pm

So publish already! Why are you wasting your time here?

RS
17 years off-grid and counting.

Sleeping in the hen house doesn't make you a chicken.
User avatar
theropod
RS Donator
 
Name: Roger
Posts: 6992
Age: 64
Male

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: CERN Neutrino speed vs SLAC E158 data

#13  Postby DavidMcC » Oct 17, 2017 4:11 pm

John Hendry wrote:Read your own posts and replies... you have over 14,000 of them here at almost 8 per day vs my 5 posts in the last 6 years that come up on Google connected to various physics topics which I why I decided to come back here and see why. This is obviously where you express your opinions (mostly philosophy) as fact and dismiss anything outside your own opinions you hang on to as fact... without presenting anything concrete such as an experiment or better some simple basic math to back up saying something using a universal language everything is based on.

If you noticed my posts are first and foremost based on using basic math and some simple basic algebra to show something spectacular yet very basic and relatively simple that outside of empty (baseless) hit and run posts like yours exposing little more than how you feel to react with emotion in the form of an insult, stands 100% undisputed despite being very controversial by changing basic understandings in physics and correcting a famous analogy on time dilation.

In fact using the proven fact space is connected to time and pointing out related obvious known facts that went blindly unnoticed I added the missing 4th oscillation phase of the graviton misnamed the hole shown opposite the electron to the atom, and in doing that also added a second reverse arrow to time needed to support an oscillation in space connected to time. Now that's hard to argue with and because logic was used and put in place the change allowed gravity on the atomic scale to be understood by simply pointing out that just as the neutron measures bigger than the proton, the graviton phase (path) measures larger than the electron phase (path) and the difference in size (length) added to the reverse oscillation phase is the cause of gravity acting as a real force connected to the observer's own center of gravity... rather than describing gravity using it's complex spacetime geometry looking at the big picture "at the same time" spread out over 13.8 billion years.

And my last post here referenced further confirmation by SLAC that has not only not been disputed, but copied and used to support other related observations in physics. So honestly the emotional response calling mathematics and associated descriptions "word soup" coming from you is to be expected. How is (e{a})/t=E word soup? That's just like saying V=IR or F=ma is word soup. And what's sad is in briefly reading your posts on Freewill you agree with what I've shown but you are way too lazy to think it out and prefer to hear yourself talk rather than try to comprehend what I said and you justify it to maintain your chemical based symmetry with an insult.

My "hit and run" post was only because I thought it was now well known that the CERN data that you are probably referring to was exposed years ago as big mistake:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster-than-light_neutrino_anomaly
There were no FTL neutrinos at CERN, and you should have found that out if you knew what you were doing.

I even posted about this years ago, but I can't keep on re-posting just so that you will notice it.
May The Voice be with you!
DavidMcC
 
Name: David McCulloch
Posts: 14519
Age: 64
Male

Country: United Kigdom
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: CERN Neutrino speed vs SLAC E158 data

#14  Postby The_Metatron » Oct 17, 2017 4:25 pm

John Hendry wrote:
[Reveal] Spoiler:
Time has a moment arm that hides gravity's tiny force by looking very large sitting close to what amounts to a fulcrum when measured by time, and it increases with time to expose the truth found in just about anything making lies increasingly hard to hide over time even without an Internet resulting in the old wise tale "time tells all". And it's now been over 5 yrs since my last post here on March 18, 2012... so after learning there is such a thing as the SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, originally called the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, I wonder how many rational minds noticed what time had to say next...:scratch:

After showing SLAC's E158 weak force asymmetry ratio matched CERN/OPERA's shocking Sept 2011 worldwide announcement by creating an asymmetry in time of 0.20e-5 sec... which added a 4th oscillation phase (graviton) to the atom and a 2nd reverse arrow to time by exposing the missing "too small to see" graviton was actually a reverse oscillation phase in space connected to time misnamed the "hole" shown opposite the electron right where it should be :clap: SLAC in need of a window to confirm the asymmetry in time exposed went back over their 9 year BaBar experiment data and "looking at it differently" :coffee: discovered it was there all along.

SLAC reported the confirmation time has asymmetry in the Journal Physical Review Letters on November 19, 2012 and gave the discovery what is called a 14-sigma level of certainty -- which is "far more than needed to declare a discovery". Showing that time has what some are calling a "preferred direction" on the quantum scale simply shows that time has an arrow that follows space in the process of Mass oscillation. And in layman terms the change in physics involving time is rather simple as it shows when we look at light we are looking at a speed of light clock generate the light... which as obvious as that is with the weak force lighting up the Sun time dilation connecting gravity to time was a very big pill to swallow.
It corrects the analogy in relativity that said if the observer looks at a speed of light clock time would stop
[Reveal] Spoiler:
and introduces constant ratio "real" time dilation based on the asymmetry of the weak force and changes E=mc2 to E=(m{a})c2 and allows the fine structure constant to be understood: (e{a})/t=E.

John P.M. said:
"What happens on the internet, stays on the internet". I wish... http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110922/ ... t-id-27540

If that were true I'd be able to show you a physicist that said I got space and time mixed up in trying to separate their measurement to support his way of thinking. To think politics of power connected to the flow of money will leave what they don't want seen on the Internet is not being Rational or Skeptical and right now that's what we all need to be in our actions and thoughts...

Neither special or general relativity say that.

Where does the speeding clock that we’re viewing, which has a mass approaching infinity as it approaches light speed, get the infinite energy to keep accelerating to reach C?


Sent from my completely solar powered iPad using Tapatalk
My new website is up. Who wants to be a contributor?

I AM Skepdickus!

https://www.skepdick.us/blog/
User avatar
The_Metatron
Moderator
 
Name: Jesse
Posts: 19548
Age: 54
Male

Country: United States
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: CERN Neutrino speed vs SLAC E158 data

#15  Postby DavidMcC » Oct 17, 2017 5:15 pm

The_Metatron wrote:
John Hendry wrote:
[Reveal] Spoiler:
Time has a moment arm that hides gravity's tiny force by looking very large sitting close to what amounts to a fulcrum when measured by time, and it increases with time to expose the truth found in just about anything making lies increasingly hard to hide over time even without an Internet resulting in the old wise tale "time tells all". And it's now been over 5 yrs since my last post here on March 18, 2012... so after learning there is such a thing as the SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, originally called the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, I wonder how many rational minds noticed what time had to say next...:scratch:

After showing SLAC's E158 weak force asymmetry ratio matched CERN/OPERA's shocking Sept 2011 worldwide announcement by creating an asymmetry in time of 0.20e-5 sec... which added a 4th oscillation phase (graviton) to the atom and a 2nd reverse arrow to time by exposing the missing "too small to see" graviton was actually a reverse oscillation phase in space connected to time misnamed the "hole" shown opposite the electron right where it should be :clap: SLAC in need of a window to confirm the asymmetry in time exposed went back over their 9 year BaBar experiment data and "looking at it differently" :coffee: discovered it was there all along.

SLAC reported the confirmation time has asymmetry in the Journal Physical Review Letters on November 19, 2012 and gave the discovery what is called a 14-sigma level of certainty -- which is "far more than needed to declare a discovery". Showing that time has what some are calling a "preferred direction" on the quantum scale simply shows that time has an arrow that follows space in the process of Mass oscillation. And in layman terms the change in physics involving time is rather simple as it shows when we look at light we are looking at a speed of light clock generate the light... which as obvious as that is with the weak force lighting up the Sun time dilation connecting gravity to time was a very big pill to swallow.
It corrects the analogy in relativity that said if the observer looks at a speed of light clock time would stop
[Reveal] Spoiler:
and introduces constant ratio "real" time dilation based on the asymmetry of the weak force and changes E=mc2 to E=(m{a})c2 and allows the fine structure constant to be understood: (e{a})/t=E.

John P.M. said:
"What happens on the internet, stays on the internet". I wish... http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110922/ ... t-id-27540

If that were true I'd be able to show you a physicist that said I got space and time mixed up in trying to separate their measurement to support his way of thinking. To think politics of power connected to the flow of money will leave what they don't want seen on the Internet is not being Rational or Skeptical and right now that's what we all need to be in our actions and thoughts...

Neither special or general relativity say that.

Where does the speeding clock that we’re viewing, which has a mass approaching infinity as it approaches light speed, get the infinite energy to keep accelerating to reach C?


...

True, it isn't actually possible to have a real clock moving at c, but note the use of the word, "IF" - it's a hypothetical situation.
May The Voice be with you!
DavidMcC
 
Name: David McCulloch
Posts: 14519
Age: 64
Male

Country: United Kigdom
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: CERN Neutrino speed vs SLAC E158 data

#16  Postby The_Metatron » Oct 17, 2017 6:14 pm

Well, so is eating your own head a hypothetical. Impossible, too. That’s why we don’t talk about it.


Sent from my completely solar powered iPad using Tapatalk
My new website is up. Who wants to be a contributor?

I AM Skepdickus!

https://www.skepdick.us/blog/
User avatar
The_Metatron
Moderator
 
Name: Jesse
Posts: 19548
Age: 54
Male

Country: United States
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: CERN Neutrino speed vs SLAC E158 data

#17  Postby DavidMcC » Oct 18, 2017 12:30 pm

The_Metatron wrote:Well, so is eating your own head a hypothetical. Impossible, too. That’s why we don’t talk about it.


...

OK, perhaps I should have put it this way:
As v(clock) -> c, apparent clock speed -> 0.
Does that work better for you, Met?
May The Voice be with you!
DavidMcC
 
Name: David McCulloch
Posts: 14519
Age: 64
Male

Country: United Kigdom
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: CERN Neutrino speed vs SLAC E158 data

#18  Postby Thomas Eshuis » Oct 18, 2017 12:33 pm

John Hendry wrote:Time has a moment arm that hides gravity's tiny force by looking very large sitting close to what amounts to a fulcrum when measured by time, and it increases with time to expose the truth found in just about anything making lies increasingly hard to hide over time even without an Internet resulting in the old wise tale "time tells all". And it's now been over 5 yrs since my last post here on March 18, 2012... so after learning there is such a thing as the SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, originally called the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, I wonder how many rational minds noticed what time had to say next...:scratch:

Nice word salad.
Also, time doesn't say anything.
"Respect for personal beliefs = "I am going to tell you all what I think of YOU, but don't dare retort and tell what you think of ME because...it's my personal belief". Hmm. A bully's charter and no mistake."
User avatar
Thomas Eshuis
 
Name: Thomas Eshuis
Posts: 27298
Age: 28
Male

Country: Netherlands
European Union (eur)
Print view this post

Re: CERN Neutrino speed vs SLAC E158 data

#19  Postby The_Metatron » Oct 18, 2017 9:28 pm

DavidMcC wrote:
The_Metatron wrote:Well, so is eating your own head a hypothetical. Impossible, too. That’s why we don’t talk about it.


...

OK, perhaps I should have put it this way:
As v(clock) -> c, apparent clock speed -> 0.
Does that work better for you, Met?

No, that wasn’t my point, really.

I always knew of physics as a means to explain what is, not what if.


Sent from my completely solar powered iPad using Tapatalk
My new website is up. Who wants to be a contributor?

I AM Skepdickus!

https://www.skepdick.us/blog/
User avatar
The_Metatron
Moderator
 
Name: Jesse
Posts: 19548
Age: 54
Male

Country: United States
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: CERN Neutrino speed vs SLAC E158 data

#20  Postby DavidMcC » Oct 19, 2017 10:34 am

The_Metatron wrote:
DavidMcC wrote:
The_Metatron wrote:Well, so is eating your own head a hypothetical. Impossible, too. That’s why we don’t talk about it.


...

OK, perhaps I should have put it this way:
As v(clock) -> c, apparent clock speed -> 0.
Does that work better for you, Met?

No, that wasn’t my point, really.

I always knew of physics as a means to explain what is, not what if.

That was the whole point of my proper version, above, which is not a "what if?".
May The Voice be with you!
DavidMcC
 
Name: David McCulloch
Posts: 14519
Age: 64
Male

Country: United Kigdom
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Next

Return to Pseudoscience

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 0 guests