the mystery of the quark

[quark]

Does anyone out there know what things that quark do?

[Pincho Paxton]

An Atom is Neutral energy, so to get something to be Neutral energy you have to presume that there is an equal energy force inside it. Electrons are negative energy, Protons are positive energy (ie.. Neutral when combined.), and Protons make up the nucleus of an atom. Quarks are supposed to stop the neucleus of an atom flying apart. The quarks are supposed to be inside the nucleus to lock it in place. Nobody has ever found a quark, and there might be other ways to stop the nucleus from flying apart anyway. personally, I would expect something to be outside the nucleus that is not accounted for, and then dispose of the Quark inside the nucleus theory altogether.

Electrons negative energy should create a glow from the atoms all of the time, but doesn't. That is part of the mystery as well. Anyway, I think that the Atom model is incomplete, and probably a bit mixed up, because scientists have added a theory that an Electron is both a particle, and a wave at the same time, and I find that to be impossible. I prefer that an electron can wobble like a wave, but not actually be a wave.

[Tomas]

Does anyone out there know what things that quark do?

Hey, quack, waz 'sappening?

1. They watch old reruns of Perry Mason.

2. Attend Billy Graham revivals.

3. Attend book signings of sci-fi authors.

4. Eat fish on Fridays.

5. Read Readers Digest.

6. Troll the Genius "Worldly Matters" forum.

7. Attend Steppenwolf concerts.

8. Collect Beanie Babies.

9. Work at a bakery.

10. Research cures for dandruff.


Thanks for your insightful question, quack...


Tomas (the tank)
VietNam veteran - 1971


.

[vicdan]

I think that the Atom model is incomplete, and probably a bit mixed up, because scientists have added a theory that an Electron is both a particle, and a wave at the same time, and I find that to be impossible. I prefer that an electron can wobble like a wave, but not actually be a wave.

That electron exhibits characteristics of both waves and particles is experimentally verified. What you 'prefer' is about as relevant as the age of my non-existent dog. The Universe doesn't conform to your delusions.

[Pincho Paxton]

I think that the Atom model is incomplete, and probably a bit mixed up, because scientists have added a theory that an Electron is both a particle, and a wave at the same time, and I find that to be impossible. I prefer that an electron can wobble like a wave, but not actually be a wave.

That electron exhibits characteristics of both waves and particles is experimentally verified. What you 'prefer' is about as relevant as the age of my non-existent dog. The Universe doesn't conform to your delusions.

No it isn't at all. The two slit experiment is perfectly predictable without wave particle duality. Same goes for all of the other experiments. Waves are always made by collisions of many things put together, or the aether. (Depends on the experiment.)

Science believes in a magic carpet ride of a wave travelling along all on its own.

[vicdan]

So tell me, how exactly is a single particle producing an interference pattern with two slits open?

[Pincho Paxton]

So tell me, how exactly is a single particle producing an interference pattern with two slits open?

The photons are hitting the electrons that have not been previously hit. I presume that the strike on the electrons is altering their energy state, so that they are less likely to be struck twice in a row. The electrons are therefore reduced in energy after a hit. But an observer can power them back up again through observation, and therfore the same electron can now be hit twice in a row.

[vicdan]

Wow. You are as deluded as I thought. No concern for the energy conservation and single-photon version of the experiment, no logic, no evidence... just fantasy.

Go back to your delusions, kid. There is perpetuum mobile in need of discovery!

[Pincho Paxton]

Wow. You are as deluded as I thought. No concern for the energy conservation and single-photon version of the experiment, no logic, no evidence... just fantasy.

Go back to your delusions, kid. There is perpetuum mobile in need of discovery!

I'm talking about the single photon experiment. What do you think I'm talking about. Add whatever energy conservation you prefer. If the electron decreases in energy then the energy can be passed elswhere. All you have to do is adapt the outcome into a different form of energy. An interchange of energy with the nucleus would be the best bet. Thus keeping the atom neutral. then the electron can slowly build up its energy again by slowly passing the nucleus.

[quark]

And this is called the genius forum?

All respondents jumped to their own conclusions without analysing the question.

But that would be consistent for a bunch of idiots who can simultaneously subscribe to a self-declared male predicted site and still consider themselves searchers for truth.

Genius forum my fundament.

My question was, Does anyone out there know what things that quark do? You bunch of self-deluded morons.
I knew the mention of quark would get you preening.

In the question, 'quark' clearly had to be verb and not a noun. You bunch of bottom feeders don't appear to have yet grasped the fundamentals of simple English grammar.

The quarks you morons assumed I was referring to do not quark, they are quarks.

The quark I was in fact referring to was a seagull's cry, which is called a quark. And what seagulls (they're the things that quark) do is shit on idiots like you. They also like to feed on rubbish dumps.

In closing I should let you know that I look forward to your responses and to watching you jump to a whole new of conclusions based on your own stupid, narcissistic misconceptions - that is if any of you have the neck to respond after demonstrating how lacking in the genius department you are.

Quark Quark

[Pincho Paxton]

And this is called the genius forum?

All respondents jumped to their own conclusions without analysing the question.

But that would be consistent for a bunch of idiots who can simultaneously subscribe to a self-declared male predicted site and still consider themselves searchers for truth.

Genius forum my fundament.

My question was, Does anyone out there know what things that quark do? You bunch of self-deluded morons.
I knew the mention of quark would get you preening.

In the question, 'quark' clearly had to be verb and not a noun. You bunch of bottom feeders don't appear to have yet grasped the fundamentals of simple English grammar.

The quarks you morons assumed I was referring to do not quark, they are quarks.

The quark I was in fact referring to was a seagull's cry, which is called a quark. And what seagulls (they're the things that quark) do is shit on idiots like you. They also like to feed on rubbish dumps.

In closing I should let you know that I look forward to your responses and to watching you jump to a whole new of conclusions based on your own stupid, narcissistic misconceptions - that is if any of you have the neck to respond after demonstrating how lacking in the genius department you are.

Quark Quark

There are 6 quarks.. hence quarks.. but you can have 1 quark.. hence Quark. You should be banned anyway for such a flame inducing post. Plus I presumed that your initial post contained bad English. Some people who write in English are from other countries.

[quark]

You know, as a matter of honor, truth and integrity I must concur with you - I should be banned for such a flame inducing post. I am guilty as charged.

Now, on the little matter of your presumption... Oh, never mind.

[Tomas]

.


Tomas muses: "Where do these clowns come from?"



-Bitch Slap-
quark - And this is called the genius forum?

-tomas-
How goes it, Bitch Slap?

This is the "worldly matters" part of Genius...




-Bitch Slap cries-
All respondents jumped to their own conclusions without analysing the question.

-tomas-
Now, calm down, Slappy... i googled the "question" and decided that your first post amounted to a big ZERO.




-Bitch Slap-
But that would be consistent for a bunch of idiots who can simultaneously subscribe to a self-declared male predicted site and still consider themselves searchers for truth.

-tomas
Are you related to Monster Cock?




-Bitch Slap-
Genius forum my fundament.

-tomas-
Oh my, better whip out my Spam-N-Smell.




-Bitch Slap quibbles-
My question was, Does anyone out there know what things that quark do? You bunch of self-deluded morons.

-tomas-
Now, don't you be taking that tone with me! (i'll get mollie after you, and she WILL deal with you)




-Bitch Slap continues-
I knew the mention of quark would get you preening.

-tomas-
So now i have to write on the blackboard "I will pay better attention to first-time posters," 100 times?




-Bitch Slap clucks-
In the question, 'quark' clearly had to be verb and not a noun. You bunch of bottom feeders don't appear to have yet grasped the fundamentals of simple English grammar.

-tomas-
Does this mean i will be suspended from your class Forever... and report directly to Study Hall? :-)




-Bitch Slap drones on-
The quarks you morons assumed I was referring to do not quark, they are quarks.

-tomas-
Well, "thanks" for not front-loading the question to us in the first place...




-Bitch Slap-
The quark I was in fact referring to was a seagull's cry, which is called a quark.

-tomas-
So now you back-load your response with...?




-Bitch Slap-
And what seagulls (they're the things that quark) do is shit on idiots like you.

-tomas-
Wow, "morons", "idiots"... you sure have a high-falutin' vocabulary! :-)


-Bitch Slap-
They also like to feed on rubbish dumps.

-tomas-
Is that where you got your computer?




-Bitch Slap baits us further-
In closing I should let you know that I look forward to your responses and to watching you jump to a whole new of conclusions based on your own stupid, narcissistic misconceptions

-tomas-
"a whole new of conclusions"?

Please explain..




-Bitch Slap- smugly states-
that is if any of you have the neck to respond after demonstrating how lacking in the genius department you are. Quark Quark

-tomas-
Oh, golly, i'm just sittin' here awaiting your next outburst!



Tomas (the tank)
VietNam veteran - 1971


.

[artmaster]

What are you'll talking about?

[artmaster]

Do any of you'll know what a quark is?

[Jamesh]

That electron exhibits characteristics of both waves and particles is experimentally verified.

My view about this is that this effect occurs because we are measuring something that is far closer to the fundamental forces, and in that which is fundamental being "forces" then their action will be like that of a wave, though in the case of the fundamental it is a holistic continuous output or input in all directions, rather than a wave.

Stuff like light however is matter (which by my definition is "anything with an observable property") and what this means is that some part of the thing called light contains a central causal area of equalisation that has the result of giving the appearance of solidity, of a particle.

Electrons are certainly both wave and particle at the same time (though particles don’t actually exist, everything is entirely causal, and in being so everything ultimately consists of invisible forces).

The particle is the balanced portion and the wave is the non-balanced portion, where the expansionary force is more dominant. The wave effect of light is formed by the destruction of inner equalised balances - by sub-nuclear decay (all things decay because nothing is ever perfectly equal, and all things are subject to destruction by that which is external to the things pattern – the decay is thus caused to occur).

This decay causes one of the basic quantum pulses of the universe. As the internals of light decay, lets call these parts quarks, then this releases expansionary force at the extremities of each electron (it’s the same for a pulsar star, or the jets that sometimes stem from the “axles” of galaxies). This released expansionary force from decaying quarks causes lights movement, but it also causes attributes that are both particle like and wavelike, such as seen by lasers and the double split experiment.

Light is essentially decaying quarks, while the aether-that-creates-lights-speed-limit is non-decaying quarks. There is an aether under this aether of course, which is space itself, and underlying space is the fundamental forces that are continually in the process of creating “space on top of space” which forms into QM strings by the action of the convergence of the contracting force (gravity) as externalities causes decay of some of these particles, which converge into quarks and so on.

If you can understand this - there will be no mystery about the why of things generally.

There is always some degree of "mystery" about the precise relationship between one formed thing and another, as that requires sufficient empirical data to be defined, but this is not important unless you want to make use of that data for some purpose.

[quark]

In this case it is the cry of a saegull.

Please attempt to stay on the subject of the post

[Pincho Paxton]

That electron exhibits characteristics of both waves and particles is experimentally verified.

My view about this is that this effect occurs because we are measuring something that is far closer to the fundamental forces, and in that which is fundamental being "forces" then their action will be like that of a wave, though in the case of the fundamental it is a holistic continuous output or input in all directions, rather than a wave.

Stuff like light however is matter (which by my definition is "anything with an observable property") and what this means is that some part of the thing called light contains a central causal area of equalisation that has the result of giving the appearance of solidity, of a particle.

Electrons are certainly both wave and particle at the same time (though particles don’t actually exist, everything is entirely causal, and in being so everything ultimately consists of invisible forces).

The particle is the balanced portion and the wave is the non-balanced portion, where the expansionary force is more dominant. The wave effect of light is formed by the destruction of inner equalised balances - by sub-nuclear decay (all things decay because nothing is ever perfectly equal, and all things are subject to destruction by that which is external to the things pattern – the decay is thus caused to occur).

This decay causes one of the basic quantum pulses of the universe. As the internals of light decay, lets call these parts quarks, then this releases expansionary force at the extremities of each electron (it’s the same for a pulsar star, or the jets that sometimes stem from the “axles” of galaxies). This released expansionary force from decaying quarks causes lights movement, but it also causes attributes that are both particle like and wavelike, such as seen by lasers and the double split experiment.

Light is essentially decaying quarks, while the aether-that-creates-lights-speed-limit is non-decaying quarks. There is an aether under this aether of course, which is space itself, and underlying space is the fundamental forces that are continually in the process of creating “space on top of space” which forms into QM strings by the action of the convergence of the contracting force (gravity) as externalities causes decay of some of these particles, which converge into quarks and so on.

If you can understand this - there will be no mystery about the why of things generally.

There is always some degree of "mystery" about the precise relationship between one formed thing and another, as that requires sufficient empirical data to be defined, but this is not important unless you want to make use of that data for some purpose.

Some of this doesn't make any sense. Some parts do.

Aether under the Aether???

Aether is as small as you can get to transport anything. And the point is that a wave shape has to be transported as a bunch of particles. You can't bend anything that is not made of particles, and a wave is a bendy line... so a wave can't exist. how would you bend a singularity?

A single photon doesn't interfere with itself. It is just grabbed by the most powerful electron in it's path like a lightening bolt. This electron then becomes weaker. So the next photon is grabbed by the next most powerful electron... this then becomes weaker. So what you get is a pattern of choices, and the pattern looks exactly like a wave. But is actually more like a paintbrush, painting up and down your wall to colour it in.

In this case it is the cry of a saegull.

Please attempt to stay on the subject of the post

The energy from the electron is then sent to your eyes as a message just like the cry of a seagull is a message to other seagulls.

[DHodges]

Wait, how old was the dog?

[Imadrongo]

Since when do gulls quark?

[Pincho Paxton]

Since when do gulls quark?

squawk is the word isn't it?

[Imadrongo]

I'm not sure what it is but I can't find any source that calls it "quark", so I'm wondering if this guy can even back that up.

[vicdan]

The seagull connection comes from 'Finnegan's Wake', where a seagull says 'three quarks for Muster Mark' -- the term 'quark' was taken from that book. It's not a seagull's squawk.

[Dave Toast]

But apparently - and you're pushed to find any reference to this whatsoever - the word is an old onomatopoeia for a gull's cry (there's no such taxonomic designation as seagull).

What this moron doesn't take into account (or rather, the moron that this monkey copied the 'trick' from) is that this is an internet board and that the internet is international and has no linguistic standards enforcement. As such you see all sorts of strange use of the English language and have to try to make sense of it with that in mind.

This dick needs a good seagulling