sci.physics.particle

On Mar 28, 2:40=A0pm, "Y.Porat" wrote:
> On Mar 28, 6:24=A0am, Kumar wrote:
snip> > Intresting but bit more technical for me. Does it not suggest
that all
> > fundamental forces are related to each other?- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> ----------------
> yes!
> i dont have a direct phone to God =A0(:-)
Trying to get such idea/knowledge (of prime/one force) may not be
possible without it. :)

> all i cantell you is my private understandings and guesses
> yet i think i have some long period of folowing scinece
> and even my private investigations and findings
> after a long resarch project about the structure of matter
> that lasted many years
> so
> yess
> i guess that actually all forces arer based on the same simple 'trick'
> that is why i suggest the 'Circlon' idea :
> a basic particle that
> *moved **naturally* in a curved path !!
> that idea should replace the 'curved space time' idea !!
> (excuse the arrogance ...)
> matter spreading nonstop a sort of a fountain
> of circlons
> they are epread out but come back because of the
> corved nature of theit movement
> and that is btw who attraction force doe snot get lost !!!
> if it was done by something that moves in straight lines
> it would ....... guess what??
> most of them should be lost in case they miss the target
> yet it does not happen =A0ass an experimantal fact
> now
> if two masses are close and each of themis spreading its
> fountain'
> there is a situation in which those circlons
> suround the other mass and hit it from its rare side @!
> may be some of them from the front side
> 9the shortest line between the two masses)
> but those at the front side ((cllide and canceleach other
> from the opposite side
> so we get
> **an unballanced force * that pushes thmmasses
> close to each other
> and stronger an stronger as comming closer
> because in that close distance
> those 'fountains are thicker !!
> how about that ??
> 2
> another surprising idea"
> if you folow my chain of orbital idea
> =A0THE CIRCLON' CAN EXPLAIN THAT CHAIN OF ORBITALS
> =A0ther very exostance and their beiavious
> a closed 'fountan ' that conraines a big amput of circlons
> canbahave like a sort of a solid ring !!!
> and there you got the chain of orbitals that are
> more massive at the base (mother orbital)
> and getting looser and less massive as they get
> firther away from that motrher orbital
> (the bundle of mass that moves ina closed circle
> i s =A0more massive at themother particle aria (volume )
> since allthe basic particles that make that structre
> always comes back in a circular movement
>
> another assumption abouth those corclons is that
> a circlon wil keep it sradius of movement
> untill and unless it colides with another one
> (parallel to Newtons forst law of motion
> but not in a straight line!)
> anothe imjportant note :
> a ring od circlons can move ijn a straight line
> ie
> if its center of gravity (of the ring) is moving in a stright line
> or simpler:
> thecenter of gravity of a ring orbital
> CAN =A0 \move in straigh tlines
> even though the movement** in the ring** is circular!! (:-)
> so =A0for a n =A0 observer from ousde it
> each circlon there is doing a composit =A0movement
> how about that ??
>
> TIA
> Y.Porat
> ---------------- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Thanks but still more technical.

Btw, can we consider GF just as an inward push ( tarnado or whirlpool
type effect) due to earth's motions?