>all particles are massless, volumeless, invisible disturbances in the interactions of invisible fields which exists everywhere all at once and if you zoom in they ignore laws of conservation or motion because le lol randumb
what the frick happened to physics? pic related, it's what an electron looks like
If that's true on a quantoom levol then why do these particles look so well defined at a naked eye level?
Research and experiment happened. I don't understand your question.
what do you mean research and experiment? what experiment proved 11 string dimensions? is doing math research in physics now?
>what the frick happened to physics?
Physicists stopped caring about reality and started caring about pure math. Electric universe theory is far better at explaining all the stuff modern physics uses math magic to get around, but science is too dogmatic to make such a big shift in models so they'd rather just keep making up dumb quantum physics paradoxes and dark matter equation fixing and whatever else.
>Electric universe.
>Literally using the same "There's a force-field but you cant see it so just trust me bro" model.
Stop doing this. Everything has a mechanical explanation.
There is an aether.
Gravity is aether pressure where F(G) = P = F/(4π(r^2)).
Light itself is waves through the aether.
Electrons produce light which as a wave cause them to repel (push away) each other. Think about how waves on a lake push things on the lake, like leaves, away from the center of where the wave was produced.
And finally when Maxwell first formulated his equations in the 1860's and 1870's he used an aether model.
>calls electric universe theory stupid
>proceeds to describe electric universe theory
Electric universe theory says the universe is full of plasma and everything is electrically connected through it.
It still doesn't answer what causes electromagnetism however. Is it the plasma itself?
>Please don't think about stuff too hard, otherwise you might think Einstein and his israelite friends are wrong.
Average israelite shill mentality.
>It still doesn't answer what causes electromagnetism however. Is it the plasma itself?
Yes, the movement of the plasma generates charge which produces electromagnetic fields which attracts more plasma which generates more charge and so on until you have a self-organizing matrix that spans the universe.
>Please don't think about stuff too hard
If you think too hard your brain pops out of your skull. Your aether meme is similar to the dark matter meme:
>it's invisible but logic dictates...
...no logic should never rule over the eyes. Seeing = believing. Otherwise it's religion: one israelite trying to outisraelite another israelite.
>Everything is an aether modality
>totally not hindu religion by the way
Okay Rajneesh.
How many doses of the vaxx did you take to lose so many IQ points?
>Electric universe theory is far better at explaining all the stuff modern physics uses math magic to get around
Lol no. EUers don't even agree if relativity is correct. They have no substitute for modern physics (GR, QM). EU "explanations" are pure hand waving, there is nothing testable or falsifiable. It's not science.
Mathematical physics is the tool which enables the modern world (satellites, semiconductors) to reject it is to be a ludite. You accuse others of being dogmatic but don't consider your own prejudice that mathematics is verboten. Imagine going down to a civil engineering department and saying "no more math". They would laugh at you.
Satellites and semiconductors were around long before physics went off the rails into purely theoretical mathematics full of made up bullshit to balance equations that otherwise don't work.
>EU "explanations" are pure hand waving, there is nothing testable or falsifiable
Meanwhile, the rigorous, testable, non-hand waveable Standard explanations:
>gravity is the bending of space... and time! "How does that happen?" Lol iunno.
>particles are particles... but also waves! light is a wave... but also a particle! "What does that mean?" Lol iunno.
>nature is... le random! "Where does the randomness come from?" Lol iunno.
>gravity is the bending of space... and time! "How does that happen?" Lol iunno.
Described by the EFE equations that let anyone calculate the effects.
Predicted gravitational lensing, gravitational redshift (pound-rebka), the Shapiro delay, gravitational waves, frame dragging and more. Tested in hundreds of different experiments and observations.
>particles are particles... but also waves! light is a wave... but also a particle! "What does that mean?" Lol iunno.
It means that you apparently doing even know high school physics. Look up the electron double slit experiment and the photoelectric effect. Described by the Schrodinger equation.
>nature is... le random! "Where does the randomness come from?" Lol iunno.
Why do you assume randomness has to "come from" somewhere?
>Described by
>Described by
>umm why are you asking that question?
Being content with "described by" doesn't even move you from geocentrism to heliocentrism. Planetary orbits are described by epicycles just fine. And when they don't fit? Just add more. Like
. Dark epicycles.
Your methodology is all fricked up. Every big step in physics was done by people who asked the questions you don't want to be asked: "How does it happen", "Why is it so" and "Where does it come from".
Actually Einstein asked, "what if light moved at the same speed no matter what your own speed is?"
That's why it's such a blunder and it ruined physics for a century.
>What if light moved at the same speed no matter what your own speed is? (instead of more reasonable hypotheses like Lorentz and Poincaré's)
>"How does that happen?" Lol iunno it just does.
>"Why is it so?" Lol iunno it's not important.
>Wtf why are our models mutually inconsistent? Why can't we advance physics anymore?
Your summary of physics is just wrong, so there's nothing to address here
dark matter is invisible
check mate
uhuh, show me a picture of a photon then
Science hasn't been about truth seeking for over 100 years. It's just a religion for the masses to push various agendas and it needs whacky sci fi physics to generate headlines to keep sheeples attention.
If you make every interaction(Newtown forces) smaller by the same constant everything looks slower. This explains GR and Lorentztransformation. The interaction get weaker because the Aether particles are less in that area or because the Aether particles are moving and have less time to interact. Basically every interaction is trough aether particles and matter can't interact with another matter without Äther particles in between.
Gravitation is similar to the mechanical explanation of gravitation with two pulsating objects on water attracting each other. With higher altitude the Aether particles move more and thus the strength of the forces are weaker.
Even if this isn't true I think you could easily model everything with that. Purely mechanical. Maybe add some electromagnetic Äther to explain the other forces. The probabilistic behavior of quantum particles can be with the chaotic behavior of the Äther particles.
Epicycles around the fact that there is an aether out of which matter is formed (so they're not elementary particles) and interacts with it (so they're never free of external influences and appear to have "random" momenta and energies)
>invisible fields
Fields are a shorthand for "operator field", which is just a mathematical tool to define some particle state in a Hilbert space. Basically, its a set of infinite operators, not some spooky object that fills space.
>not some spooky object that fills space.
>yeah bro entanglement isnt spooky action at a distance even though this phrase has been used seriously by many physicists
Your brain has rotten on IFLS pop-physics
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_at_a_distance#%22Spooky_action_at_a_distance%22
>Einstein wrote to Max Born about issues in quantum mechanics in 1947 and used a phrase translated as "spooky action at a distance". The phrase has been picked up and used as a description for the cause of small non-classical correlations between physically separated measurement of entangled quantum states.
>our model doesn't fit the data
>call the difference "dark" something and incorporate it into our new model
>now our model fits the data
DM is not simply defined as the discrepancy. It is a predictive model: