In an extension of what I said to Farsight, anyone wishing to espouse their pet take on things pertaining to quarks should do so in the fringe section. There is a difference between "I do not understand how the mainstream describes this, how is [result] obtained?" and "That's BS, clearly quarks work like....".
If someone feels that another poster is on the wrong side of this line then do not engage them further but flag it for the moderating team and we'll do something. This isn't a 'one strike and you're out!' thing but use some judgement as to how much of what you're saying is genuine enquiry and how much is you just giving your two cents on some domain of reality you have no experience of, either experimental or theoretical, or data on.
The thread topic is one which invites speculation but assertions of certainty or how you can explain it all are
obviously unjustified and without scientific merit and thus belong elsewhere. Questions like "what is the physical interpretation of the mainstream notion of quantum fields" do not have a definitive answer but at least you're starting from a model which demonstrably works in its task of describing physical processes. Pulling out assertions of your pet theory about how particles are knots in space-time, trapped photons or that their 'purest essence' is the 'stress of space-time' do not start from such a position, as all are as yet unable to show any ability to correctly describe the dynamics of relevant systems. Farsight is the canonical example, claiming to 'understand' better than anyone and yet his work cannot model
any relevant physical phenomenon. If your claims are on similar
non-existent foundations then take them elsewhere.
But seeing as Farsight has now given way to Undefined in terms of pet theory peddling I'll highlight an example of what
not to post here :
Aside from this paragraph using terminology in a nonsensical way it has the initial conceptual position of "
I observe that there is no logical reason why ... cannot....". That isn't how science works and isn't how discussions in this part of the forum should work. Science isn't "Here is my assertion, prove it isn't viable!" but "Here is my assertion along with detailed explanations and justifications for why it is a viable point of view".
Undefined, can you use such a point of view to actually model anything? No, obviously not. Can you provide even the most rudimentary formalisation to show it is more than just buzzwords? No, obviously not. Hence your position is one of spewing a pet theory while simultaneously demonstrating a fundamental misunderstanding of how scientific discussion works. Sure, this forum isn't a journal but still you cannot just keep spewing such things out. Given the lack of formalisation, detailed or justification the only response anyone can give is "That is without justification or merit",
at which point you should stop posting it here. If you had details, formalisations to show there is more than just buzzwords to your position, then that would at least be something. Due to the lack of any kind of substance no one can disprove or even counter such a claim but that doesn't mean it is worthy of discussion or should be taken seriously (see
Russell's teapot). If someone is wishing to put forth a position or claim in this subforum they should ask themselves
not "Can this be refuted by others?" but "Can this be justified by
me?". You have failed to do the latter by doing the former.
And before anyone whines about shutting down scientific discourse sometimes it is necessary to prune weeds to let flowers grow. Flooding discussions and even entire forums with BS kills meaningful discussion, as was illustrated over the last month+ during my absence.
Any further discussion in this thread should
not continue the discussion of the previous page or two. If someone wishes to query my position on all of this then either PM me or start a thread in the government forum for public discussion on it. From here on though I suggest people think which side of the "Sceptical enquiry vs asserting peddling" line they are on
before they post.