Nowhere did I indicate that the predictions were on behalf of Mr. Anderton’s theories.
Although, in an extremely general way, all theories that contain universal truths will converge at some conceptual domain.
It seems to me that the scientists want to find out by themselves the truths involved in all the phenomenon that occur in the universe.
That in my opinion is kind of strange, why not first decipher the info in the old books and see if it is relevant to modern times.
There are many old books that contain very good or “true†information about various observed phenomenon.
For instance; A Treatise On Electricity And Magnetism.
By James Clerk Maxwell, published in 1891, gives very good examples of various electrical and magnetic phenomenon.
The older the book the more obscure the meaning of some written words become.
Mr. Maxwell used words such as “virtuously†and “resinously†electrified bodies.
How many schools or scientists use those terms today?
Similarly, even older book called the Bible gives a very good explanation of the fundamental structure of the universe, but the words that are used there do not have the same connotation to them today as they had at the time of the writing.
In order for you to understand the explanation of non-existing monopoles, you would need to understand the formula that predicts it.
If you make a valiant effort at understanding the formula by going to this website:
http://space-religion.com/More_of_the_theory.php
and reading the information, then perhaps you will understand the real reason why monopoles do not exist.
However; since you asked, I will try to give you a quick answer.
The effect that is known as a “magnetic field†is a “field†that must always be associated with two “charges,†if the charges are isolated or considered independently then they are simply “charges†and not magnetic “monopoles.â€
Charges = plural of a charge.
The arbitrary “charge†of an electron is “negative.â€
The arbitrary “charge†of the proton is “positive.â€
Off Topic » in reply to Remember when I asked what theory you made the prediction for?
re:There is no flipping or flopping.
The whole thread (87 posts)
- Music from Space and Unified Field Theory
- Music Vii
- re: Thanks (n/t)
- Music from Space VI
- Music V
- Music from Space IV
- Music from Space Part III
- Music from Space Part II
- Music from Space Part II
- re: Music from Space and Unified Field Theory
- re: Music from Space and Unified Field Theory
- James.......
- Ever notice how really shaky ideas...
- re: Ever notice ....
- Debate is not really how good science is determined.
- re: Verifiable predictions
- Science does not usually require bravery; only intellegence.
- re: In that case, I’ll rephrase the question.
- I'm sorry, there are too many theories on the playing field.
- re: Let us back track a little bit
- What does Mr. Anderton's gobbledygook have to do with monopoles and gravity?
- re: Mr Anderton was talking, among other things, about
- OK.
- Wait...
- re: Some people doubt your words
- Where's Marshall McLullen when you need him?
- re: Some people doubt your words
- re: Mr Anderton was talking, among other things, about
- What does Mr. Anderton's gobbledygook have to do with monopoles and gravity?
- re: Let us back track a little bit
- I'm sorry, there are too many theories on the playing field.
- Now that I think about it, I can make a prediction for you.
- re: In that case, I’ll rephrase the question.
- Science does not usually require bravery; only intellegence.
- re: Debate is not really how good science is determined. - Thanks, generous, Al.
- re: Verifiable predictions
- Mr Anderton can start talking
- Debate is not really how good science is determined.
- re: Ever notice ....
- Ever notice how really shaky ideas...
- James.......
- Music Vii
