There is no atom, free electrons are photons!

Hello

Now that I've caught your attention, you maybe asking “what going on here” Let me fill you in. I’m pleading to anyone that is able to debate with a fellow, who I’ve interpreted to be an experienced electrician, that makes the bold claim that science is fictional and is built on a foundation of myths. What you’ve read in the topic is exactly what he claims and he backs it up with a lot of data which is oblivious to myself and many non-elites in the physics arena.

Let me paste my post and his post:

Is anyone willing to debate with him? He says that his debate has been held in this forum before but I couldn’t find post entries when searching for his handle. Anyone willing to debate please post in his desired arena,
http://www.coralcastle.com/forums/default.asp

The origination of the quotes were from http://www.torrentspy.com/comments.asp?mod...w&id=2988&pg=21

Please remember to provide a link to your post back here at physorg so interested parties may view the discussion.
He responds promptly in the torrentspy forum so you can post there aswell if you like.

I can't debate; I'm only a moron... all I can really do is argue. But I'm not even gonna do that, because I already believe he's correct --- electrons _are_ photons, after all; they're only 'folded' differently... otherwise, exactly the same energy. Obvious, when you think about it...

template, I'm sorry, but you've been taken for a fool. This electrician's explanation is actually just a bunch of mumbo jumbo with electrician jargon interlaced with it. I wouldn't want him near my house.

Evidence for the existence of atoms:

Brownian Motion as evidence for the existence of molecules:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brownian_motion

Applet illustrates Brownian Motion and Einstein's explanation from his 1905 paper:
http://galileo.phys.virginia.edu/classes/1...n/brownian.html

Physicists at Canada's National Research Council in Ottawa have produced a 3D CT scan of electron orbitals:
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID...0000&sc=I100322

Not to mention the fact that all of physics, chemistry, biology, as well as most of science is based on the principle of the atom. Explain chemical reactions, nuclear decay, crystalline structure, and digestion without atoms and molecules and I'll call the nearest mental institution.

Electrons are not photons!
Definition of the electron
Definition of the photon

Electrons have a positive rest mass, a charge of -1, and can travel at speeds from 0 up to near the speed of light; photons have no rest mass, no charge, and always travel at the speed of light ©. Electrons are fermions, which means they have a half-integer spin (in this case, a spin of 1/2); photons are bosons, which means they have an integer spin (in this case, a spin of 1).

I don't know what more I can say. They're just entirely fundamentally different. There's no real argument because, by definition, the electron and photon are nothing alike.

Dear moron -

well, no. Regardless of whatever folding you're talking about, we very definitely use electrons to educe photons of a very high and specific energy at Brookhaven National Labs (BNL).


Note one of his first statements, which should give it away (besides the spelling and grammatical errors):

A photon is definitely NOT a free electron. This is easily measured. Tell him to come down to my lab. Also, I can split a photon into 2 daughter photons - I canNOT do this w/ an electron.

I could recommend some easy experiments to demonstrate these things quite readily, but from the sound of it, he would blow himself up or seriously hurt himself.

yeah, I agree with the above post. The best argument is that current science and technology does WORK, and it's all based around the model of the atom. And what's up with mixing in the mythos of Osiris at the end? That just makes no sense.

Right -

Phoenix has a great point - you canNOT have an electron laser, b/z the Pauli exclusion principle states that you cant have 2 fermions (particle w/ spin |n/2>) w/ the exact same quantum state. We use lasers all the time, however, since the photons are bosons and dont obey Paul Exclusion. Photons involved are often "pumped" into the same quantum state and hence have the LASER Light Amplified by Stimulated Emission of Radiation) characteristics of all being in the same quantum state.


I hear my neighbor's lasers firing right now - about 90 times/second - just down the hall from my office.

If this guy tries to play his favorite CD w/ an electron stream rather than a laser beam, he will be in for a seriously screwed up surprise.

In the original forum we were discussing about an article Kansas School : 'Evolution Wars'

The guy came in the forums and stated that science is crap. something along those lines. actually I found the quote

"Science is not logical, it is totally wrong in it's fundamental views, and it has no basis for it's claims in the understanding of what is happening around itself. The structure is weak, they base their conclusions off of myth, and thereby they are easily controlled. Don't believe it? Wanna go deeper? I don't think you do."

"If you can disproove any one part of the system then you can disproove the whole system and currently the photon has been disprooven and backed by sound fundamentals. Thereby what you study, I/E the Bible, Science, if you don't understand it, then don't preach it. Otherwise when someone challenges it and shows that you taught it wrong to begin with you will look like a fool as the truth comes into the light. Fools."


Then he blabbed about some equations and such to prove his point. while everyone was telling him he was twisting terminology for his claims. I would assume he was just playing around but later on, a link was posted by someone else that showed armored13 debated on another forum about the same thing which had many many posts. From that it looked as if he wasn't joking and believed in what he was typing. So I tried to pin him down by having him talk here at phyorg in hopes of someone could slap some sense into him.

(wanna see his ramble?)

Ah is that so, I couldn't make heads or tails of it.

Nooooo! Spare us!

solidspin,

Why is it hard to acknowledge that there is no proton, photon, electron, neutron, quark, ect. in the electrical world? Do you call light a photon, do you acknowledge that electricity creates light, do you know what makes up a volt, do you know what comes out of the generator that produces the field to light the bulb? I can guarantee there is nothing in electricity that even remotely resembles a mythological ball of crap that has other balls of crap flying around the outside. The inner ball said to be the proton, the outer balls said to be the electrons. Electricity creates what you measure with, why would you study anything but electricity.

I don't have to "Tell him to come down to my lab"

If you want to know what is in the electircal field and what you are observing all you have to do is question it.

The site below offers a more refined theory by a Physics professor that matter doesn't exist in physical form, but is a special construction of "Resonant Field" waves. You all probably know enough Physics to determine whether the theory in this URL is worth considering. I surely don't.

http://rmrc.org/rft/index.htm

"Everything in the universe is made of continuously-moving, light-speed
Resonant Fields."

This site promotes an e-book "Resonant Fields, the Fundamental Mechanism of Physics" by Dr. John N. Hait, PhD. which claims to present a grand unification theory for all the fields, forces, and particles of physics, both in the macroscopic and subatomic quantum world. He doesn't agree with the probability doctrine of quantum physics. His theory rests upon predictable interactions of resonant E & M fields producing what we perceive as matter, light, gravity, nuclear forces, etc. His EM fields are somewhat different from the traditional sinusoidal electric field perpendicular to magnetic field moving linearly concept, although those exist for non-particle wave radiations. For particles, the E and M fields are possibly oriented at other than 90-degrees, or continuously rotating, and in resonant loops, I think. Uncertainty exists because we see particles as distinct bodies rather than as EM-like waves. In this concept, everything is mathematically predictable, and Heisenberg's uncertainty only appears to be correct because our basic concepts are flawed - there is no particle to see unless we look over at least one wavelength of what we perceive as "matter". That wavelength is the uncertainty. Dr. Hait claims his theory explains all physical forces including gravity in one unifield field theory. Since he is a Physicist, I assume his theory accounts for nuclear spins and other proven concepts.

Anyway, if you all have time, see what you think & let me know.

so your saying there is no photon etc. basing it on electrical information and measurement yet as far as i am aware current therories involving the atom explain phenomenom almost perfectly. how do you offer an explanation for radioactive decay etc using your ideas untill you come up with a whole scientif theory that is testable can explain other phenomenom etc. then just shut the hell up if you are as clever as you beleive then it should be easy untill then stop thinking you are clever because you disagree with 99.9% of all other scientist's ok.

also not just electricity produces light chemical reactions also produce light even heating something up can produce light all explained with the energy level structure of electrons around the nucleaus when electrons gain ebergy go up in there energy level but they are unstble in higher energy levels so lose energy and release the loss of energy as photons also know as light waves and mediators of the em force. also there can be such a thing as free electrons otherwise your tv would not work ( a conventional tv tht is) as a cathode ray is nothing more than a stream of electrons and as you said on the other forums you worked at cable company's i thought you would at least no how a conventional tv works tutut.

didnt put my name on the last reply well its yian

lol I already find it enjoyable with the first well placed pun. good post Dick Petit!

thanx for taking the time to post in here Armored. I know it gets tiresome debating the same thing over and over again. You have the most spirit of anyone I've ever met. "Resonant Field Theory" sounds sweet to your ears no doubt.

I can live knowing that atoms have no physical form. from this point of view certain scientific studies may have been founded on an incorrect assumption. But i'm sure no one would claim the benifits from the scientific studies based on the incorrect assumption has lead to an overall waste of human effort. Even if the foundation is fictional, the results are real (drugs, electronics, soon quantium computers). I think "Resonant Field Theory" adds more to the existing knownledge base rather than taking it away. The phrase "knowledge is power" is the exact reason why we strive for the "truth", because the truth has "value". With new knowledge we benifits through its application.

If you think about it, truth and value are inseparable. What has the most value will no doubt be classified as the truth. This was the point I expressed to you Armored (in my last post, "You’re an experienced electrician and you perceive things through that way, chemists and physicist have their own experiences that I imagine reinforce their beliefs. "), what works is whats right. When you claimed that there was no atom, this idea was incompatible with the works of others since no alternative was given to explain the processes they knew. If "Resonant Field Theory" is explanatory sufficient for all fields of study, then it is "more" true than all other theories (keeping the "relative" meaning of truth).

I've come to respect all perspectives on this issue and am satisfied with the theory that brings a uniform understanding on all sides.

Thanx to all who participated, may the force be with you (seen star wars ep 3 recently )