Classical physics predict weights (W) should NOT change at increasing temperature (T) in vacuum. Relativistic physics predicts W should INCREASE at increasing T in vacuum. My theory predicts W should DECREASE at increasing T in vacuum and can be found here yaniv-stern.webnode.com. W reduction at increasing T in vacuum disproves conservation of mass and most of the rest of physics. Over the past ten years I contacted thousand of scientists to weigh a heated metal in vacuum and publish the results. I did NOT get the results of the experiment. #Results Required.

Maybe that 'thousand of scientists' think you should do your own fucking homework?

Apt, then, that the address at which the theory "can be found" is an empty email message to Yaniv.

Another future Nobel winner posts first in RatSkep!!

OlivierK wrote:Apt, then, that the address at which the theory "can be found" is an empty email message to Yaniv.

Apologies for the mistake. Check this link yaniv-stern.webnode.com.

BlackBart wrote:Maybe that 'thousand of scientists' think you should do your own fucking homework?

I did my homework searched the literature and couldn't find the results of the experiment. #ResultsRequired

laklak wrote:Another future Nobel winner posts first in RatSkep!!

I already contacted many scientists, universities, journals, societies, websites and science forums before posted this thread in RatSkep.

Are the electrons and positrons referred to in your theory the same objects that we might be familiar with as being called electrons and positrons?

If so, why are you asking for an experiment involving measurements of weight in vacuum, rather than some of the many other experiments that would also be able to falsify your theory - e.g. what happens when electrons and positrons interact - in conventional theory they mutually annihilate and release photons, in your theory they appear to bond to form stable nuclei.

Or another another simple experimental test: You've hypothesised that the Earth has an enormous net positive charge, which we experience as gravity. You could ask whether there's experimental evidence of free electrons reacting to the huge electromagnetic field of the Earth, couldn't you?

Thommo wrote:Are the electrons and positrons referred to in your theory the same objects that we might be familiar with as being called electrons and positrons?

If so, why are you asking for an experiment involving measurements of weight in vacuum, rather than some of the many other experiments that would also be able to falsify your theory - e.g. what happens when electrons and positrons interact - in conventional theory they mutually annihilate and release photons, in your theory they appear to bond to form stable nuclei.

In my theory P and E particles are not identical to positrons and electrons.

How would we detect them?

Would we expect them to deflect in the presence of a strong field of electrical charge?

Thommo wrote:How would we detect them?

Would we expect them to deflect in the presence of a strong field of electrical charge?

In my theory slow P and E particles should deflect more than fast P and E particles in an electric field.

But to be clear, you're saying the Earth has a large net positive charge that would attract all electrons, yes?

So for example, you could test your theory by buying an ordinary compass and seeing if it constantly tries to point downwards.

Thommo wrote:But to be clear, you're saying the Earth has a large net positive charge that would attract all electrons, yes?
So for example, you could test your theory by buying an ordinary compass and seeing if it constantly tries to point downwards.

I don't understand this experiment. Are you talking electric or magnetic fields ? Why not begin with proposed experiment in the title of this thread ?

Because a household compass is much easier to get a hold of than emailing a thousand scientists.

You want an experiment to test your hypothesis and there's one you can do very easily with nothing more than a quick trip to the shops to buy a compass and a spare ten minutes this morning, by yourself.

This will easily provide you with the data you need to attempt a falsification of your hypothesis.

Thommo wrote:Because a household compass is much easier to get a hold of than emailing a thousand scientists.

You want an experiment to test your hypothesis and there's one you can do very easily with nothing more than a quick trip to the shops to buy a compass and a spare ten minutes this morning, by yourself.

This will easily provide you with the data you need to attempt a falsification of your hypothesis.

But a compass does not interact with static electric fields ? I still don't understand the reasoning behind your experiment.

Yeah, so wiggle it about a bit, it would then - if you're right about the Earth having a large positive electric charge - react to the magnetic field.

Failing that you could also look into whether electrons are all attracted to the Earth with a large force, as well. This would be an easily observable effect in the scientific literature.

Thommo wrote:Yeah, so wiggle it about a bit, it would then - if you're right about the Earth having a large positive electric charge - react to the magnetic field.

Failing that you could also look into whether electrons are all attracted to the Earth with a large force, as well. This would be an easily observable effect in the scientific literature.

I still don't understand your experiment but predict a compass should fall down to earth.

Ok, here's another simple one.

If you rub a balloon on your jumper it acquires a static charge. In the conventional theory, this static charge will allow it to cling to a wall or ceiling (assume the balloon is filled with air, so would otherwise fall down).

If you're right, this balloon when charged statically would react to the large static charge of the Earth. Again you could easily verify whether this happens in your own home.

Thommo wrote:Ok, here's another simple one.

If you rub a balloon on your jumper it acquires a static charge. In the conventional theory, this static charge will allow it to cling to a wall or ceiling (assume the balloon is filled with air, so would otherwise fall down).

If you're right, this balloon when charged statically would react to the large static charge of the Earth. Again you could easily verify whether this happens in your own home.

The static charge on a balloon brought at close proximity to a wall interacts more strongly with charged particles in the wall than with the earth.

Yaniv wrote:

Thommo wrote:Ok, here's another simple one.

If you rub a balloon on your jumper it acquires a static charge. In the conventional theory, this static charge will allow it to cling to a wall or ceiling (assume the balloon is filled with air, so would otherwise fall down).

If you're right, this balloon when charged statically would react to the large static charge of the Earth. Again you could easily verify whether this happens in your own home.

The static charge on a balloon brought at close proximity to a wall interacts more strongly with charged particles in the wall than with the earth.

I'm not sure how you'd deduce that without an equation governing force, charge and distance. Or are we to assume Coulomb's law here?

However, you don't have to put the balloon near the wall for the test. If you're right a statically charged balloon should fall much, much, much faster than a non statically charged balllon. This would be easily testable in your own home.