Art Unwin wrote:
On Sep 4, 9:45?pm, wrote:
Art Unwin wrote:
In Switzerland on the 10th of this month they are going to project a
particle thru the Earths crust at the speed of light. The particle
that they are projecting comes from outer space.

Well actually they are going project 2 locally generated proton beams
around a giant circle at 99.99% the speed of light so that they
collide.

But don't let easily verifiable facts get in your way.

So what does this
have to do with antennas?

Nothing.

Low energy particles are in abundance on Earth as they are in space

Actually, high energy particles are in abundance on Earth as they
are in space, they are called cosmic rays, but again don't let easily
verifiable facts get in your way.

but they obtain their own magnetic field as they enter the earths
arbitrary field and settle on such things as antennas made from a
diamagnetic material!

And thus we have completed our journey to la-la land.

Hope you enjoyed the trip.

snip remaining babble

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

My understanding was that the experiment that I described was the
initiating test where the collider experiment
was going to start around November. So If I am behind in the facts,
and I may be, you are surely aware that one of the tests is as I
described !

Wrong, everything goes around in a circle in a vacuum.

There never was a plan to do anything else.

Nothing is going into the Earth's crust.

Either way the search is for info on the leptons and their bye
products such as Neutrinos which I have stated before can well be the
same particle involved with radiatiation.

Wrong, the search is for information on the collision of large hadrons
which are composed of quarks, not leptons, and specifically to see if
the Higgs boson is produced in the collision.

This would be a step in the search for a so called Grand Unified
Theory which would unify electromagnetism, the strong nuclear force,
and the weak nuclear force, leaving out only gravity.

Neutrinos are leptons, not a by product of leptons.

Since you declare your self
so up to date I would like to hear your opinion as to why my
explanation of radiation is incorrect
instead of immittating a reckless smart arse plus your interpretation
of the electro-weak force which overides my explanation?

I declare myself able to read and as having stayed awake during physics
classes enough to know there is no such thing as an "electro-weak force".

www.cern.ch


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.