Quote:
On 2003-01-22 12:44, Bossieman wrote:
I list a few predictions from the theory.
1. Decay time depends on temperature.
|
No, you are wrong here. I'm not sure if you mean the spontaneous decay of radioactive materials or the decay of subatomic particles (muons for instance), but either way you are wrong. It has been shown in countless experiments that the decay of radioactive materials is independent of temperature. Also, it's hard to give a temperature for a subatomic particle since temperature is defined by an ensemble average. So you are wrong unless you have a very creative definition of temperature.
Quote:
|
2. Gravity can be neutralized,
|
How? What exactly do you mean by this statement.
Quote:
|
3. There is no end in searching for heavier elementary particles.
|
Perhaps, but you will need to prove it.
Quote:
|
4. All particles have mass, even the neutrinos.
|
By all particles, I'm assuming you mean even the photon, which is of course false.
Quote:
5. The graviton can never be seen.
6. The graviton is antiparticle to the photon.
|
Prove it. Show me the math.
Huh? What does this mean?
Quote:
|
8. Everything will behave as waves at low tempertures.
|
Maybe. Depends on what you mean by "everything."
Quote:
|
9. No need for antimatter
|
Whether you need it or not is irrelevant since it's been observed.
Quote:
|
10. Galaxies are dissolving. Stars doesnt attract eachother. The opposite happens.
|
This is a rather bizarre statement. What makes "star" mass any different than "earth" mass? Why is it that the earth is attracted to the Sun (a star) but other stars are not? Why is your mass attracted to the Earth so you are not thrown out into space? Besides, we clearly observe stars being attracted by other stars.
Quote:
|
Do I have too prove it? A theory is correct until it has been proven wrong.
|
Yes, you have to prove it. This is not like a court of law (innocent until proven guilty). Actually it sort of is like a court. You have been accused of saying nonsense and you have to prove that you are correct.
Quote:
|
When we look at galaxies the stars has to high velocity in the outer rings.
|
This is true, but I don't see how it supports your conclusions.
Quote:
|
The galaxy should just spit out stars all the time. And that is exactly what the galaxy is doing. All stars in the galaxy is pushing eachother further away from eachother. If you did a computer model of this you would actually get a spiralgalaxy.
|
So you are saying that our galaxy is unstable? How could this produce a spiral galaxy?