A Paradox of science.

In Chemistry , two substances bond by one of the substances having a greater energy than the other allowing the field bonds to be crossed to form a new element.
The proton joins the proton removing the s1 layer field and expanding the layer to a s2 layer
by the greater electrical energy contained in the now two protons.
Protons in the sun are crushed down by the proton-proton chain to produce an original state of massless electrolytes that then reform.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Nope. Not even close. Chemistry does not involve itself with "proton joining proton." That is fusion. And the result of fusion is neither massless nor an electrolyte. You're just mixing a lot of words into a salad hoping they make you sound smart.

Didn't you promise to stop posting woo until you understood even basic arithmetic? Someone who doesn't even understand negative numbers should concentrate on the basics before they start trying to make salad.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Not a proton fusing with the proton, the protons force of attract breaking the fields ,

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I have drawn you a picture.

 

This is precisely the problem! You insist on using technical terms to make your idea sound more technical, but it has the opposite effect because you use the terms incorrectly. I will highlight the offending terms and define them so you hopefully can see the problem.

So in saying that lets get irrational and do some crazy thinking, a Photon is a massless electrolyte that group to form an electrolyte better known has a quarks that make up an a Proton , that does not have an electron attached but produces an electromagnetic field and electromotive force around itself by being in the constant flow of itself.
Atoms can never touch because they develop this field that stops them touching so they form an electro plasm between them to form molecules that then form matter.
Neutrons are attracted to the protons and get caught within the generated field,spinning with the within the field and when the proton has more energy gained it increases the electromotive force movement generating kinetic heat in the plasm bonding.[/QUOTE]

Electrolyte: a substance that ionizes when dissolved in suitable ionizing
solvents such as water

Quarks: Quarks have various intrinsic properties, including electric charge, mass, color charge and spin. Photons are not quarks by definition.

Electromotive force: It is generally defined as potential for a source in circuit. Such a voltage is indistinguishable in qualitative terms from that which is developed when a current passes through a resistor, for example.

Kinetic heat: Friction

plasm bonding: Plasma is one of the 4 state of matter, it is essentially ionized atoms not in solution. Bonding in chemistry is when 2 or more elements combine through their electrons to form a compound.

So you hopefully can see that trying to add terms you do not understand just makes you post MORE difficult for us to decipher.

 

You drew a bunch of circles and triangles. Perhaps your time would be better spent learning basic math?

 

Actually in chemistry 2 or more element bond so that their free energy is lower and they NEVER form a new element.

Chemical bonds involves the sharing of electron in outer electron shell, it never involves the bonding of protons.

It sounds like you are trying to discuss the fusing of hydrogen to helium. The fusion product are neither massless nor electrolytes.

 

Electrolyte: a substance that ionizes when dissolved in suitable ionizing
solvents such as water

Quarks: Quarks have various intrinsic properties, including electric charge, mass, color charge and spin. Photons are not quarks by definition.

Electromotive force: It is generally defined as potential for a source in circuit. Such a voltage is indistinguishable in qualitative terms from that which is developed when a current passes through a resistor, for example.

Kinetic heat: Friction

plasm bonding: Plasma is one of the 4 state of matter, it is essentially ionized atoms not in solution. Bonding in chemistry is when 2 or more elements combine through their electrons to form a compound.

So you hopefully can see that trying to add terms you do not understand just makes you post MORE difficult to decipher.[/QUOTE]
Of cause my terms are different for my use, I am thinking irrational now, I know quarks have intrinsic properties, I know what an electrolyte is etc,
Electrolyte a substance that is diluted to its smallest form, I suggest that an atom is only a Proton and the electron is the field generated by the Proton, that has an electromotive force in the opposite direction making a negative from the positive.

 

I did not know you were purposely being irrational. No further discussion need then.

 

You know my irrational thinking I eventually try to turn into rational thinking by looking at the irrational thinking.

SO I will take my statement and analyse the statement now in my own head to see if I can make rational sense of my thought.

'' a Photon is a massless electrolyte''

A Photon is massless but it is said to be a particle, and light has a force so we can only presume it has some Physical presence.
An electrolytes is a conglomeration of Ions, '' An ion is a charged atom or molecule. It is charged because the number of electrons do not equal the number of protons in the atom or molecule''
'' giving the atom or molecule a net positive or negative electrical charge.''

''The intrinsic properties of photons, such as charge, mass and spin, are determined by the properties of this gauge symmetry''

So in breaking an electrolyte down, it is atoms, so in breaking in the atoms down , it is protons, in breaking the protons down it is quarks, in breaking the quarks down it is ?

Light is electro light, diluted down to a Photon than does have rest mass when stopped by such has a black hole, or absorbs-ion,

 

tc, please stop. You're only embarrassing yourself.

 

So you can't even understand your own posts. Welcome to our world.

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

But, but, but, I thought light was an illusion?

 

Okay... enough is enough.

Of cause my terms are different for my use, I am thinking irrational now, I know quarks have intrinsic properties, I know what an electrolyte is etc,
Electrolyte a substance that is diluted to its smallest form, I suggest that an atom is only a Proton and the electron is the field generated by the Proton, that has an electromotive force in the opposite direction making a negative from the positive.[/QUOTE]

Basically, you admit to knowing you are misusing the terminology and are doing so intentionally... for what purpose, I have no idea.

Essentially, this sounds like an Appeal to Complexity mixed with Suppressed Evidence (Lying by Omission/Half Truths) or even Argumentum ex culo... possibly even abuse of an Intuition pump.

 

In this instance I am looking for comparisons, I mention irrational thinking, looking at collectives. A substance is a group of electrolytes a solute to a solution.
In comparison I consider the Sun and Plasma, and look at the Sun in a way making it a solute, and space becomes the solution.
I look at a light bulb in the same way and consider electricity to be diluted by the volume of space by the exposed element of the bulb.

''Essentially, this sounds like an Appeal to Complexity mixed with Suppressed Evidence (Lying by Omission/Half Truths) or even Argumentum ex culo... possibly even abuse of an Intuition pump''

I have no idea what that means, but on what I think it means, I am not lying, I state an irrational thought, so yes the statements will come across has irrational , it was my intention for the statements to be irrational not in the sense of a but in the sense of it had suppose to be irrational.
On a personal note I would love to see anyone create terminology that is not already in use and try to explain any new ideas without using terminology that already exists. This is why it is hard, my ideas do not have names , and even if I give them names , then the name would not mean anything to yourselves


The irrational post reworded with my terms reads like this


So in saying that lets get irrational and do some crazy thinking, a Photon is a ''dilution'' of plasma by spacial volume, that group to form a ? better known has a ? that make up Quarks and eventually a Proton, a Proton that does not have an electron attached but a suggested production of an electromagnetic field and or an electromotive force around itself by being in the constant of ''diluted'' plasma.
Protons can never touch because they develop ''this'' field that stops them from making contact , so they form between them an electroplasmic residue to form molecules that then form matter.
Neutrons are attracted to the protons and get caught within the generated field and when the proton has more energy gained by Thermodynamics or increase in radiation it increases the field force generating kinetic heat in the electroplasmic insulator that causes the matter to expand its molecules.

''an intuition pump is a thought experiment structured to allow the thinker to use their intuition to develop an answer to a 'problem''

and yes.

 

IRRATIONAL:

[1] without the faculty of reason; deprived of reason.

[2] without or deprived of normal mental clarity or sound judgment.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/irrational

 

Yes and when all the rational answers have been answered if there is still questions left we have to look towards an irrational answer that might just turn out the rational answer in the end.

 

Yes this is what I am trying to show science.

''A popular strategy in philosophy is to construct a certain sort of thought experiment I call an intuition pump [...]. Intuition pumps are cunningly designed to focus the reader's attention on "the important" features, and to deflect the reader from bogging down in hard-to-follow details. There is nothing wrong with this in principle. Indeed one of philosophy's highest callings is finding ways of helping people see the forest and not just the trees''

 

You have an odd idea of how science works.

 

I just have odd ideas in general, any way I am trying to get you to see past all the red tape and technical terms and simply see this.