On May 14, 2:51*pm, wrote:
On 14 mai, 01:00, "Y.y.Porat" wrote:

On May 13, 3:13 pm, wrote:

On 13 mai, 02:36, "Y.y.Porat" wrote:

On May 12, 7:28 pm, wrote:

On 12 mai, 10:22, "Y.Porat" wrote:

On May 12, 3:15 pm, wrote:

On 12 mai, 04:10, PCB wrote:

On May 11, 10:46 pm, wrote:

On 11 mai, 12:36, PCB wrote:

On May 11, 6:02 pm, Tom Roberts wrote:

so what and how itis created *BY THE ELECTRON ??!!

Look at the equations I gave you. They explain it.

waht is it s'raw material for doing it if the
electron is an indivisible entity ??

Energy. Plain and simple

maybe this extract will explain a little more
for you, but I doubt it. I have tried in the
past to explain this to you.

http://pages.videotron.com/ceber/decoupling_orbit.jpg

----------
------

*It simply is "made

???????
very scientific

up of" both an electric field and a magnetic field

but that is exactly the question:
what are those fileld bhind those abstract words!!

They are a mathematical representation of the dynamic
nature of the energy that makes up the substance of
the electron.

and is it the complete representation of the eelctron??
just because you saied so ??
----------

what are they made of
are they made of 'pjhtons how and why are they move
as they do and not otherwise * *etc

Yes. They are made up of the same substance as
photons. The equations I gave you describe both,
but I don't think you will understand the math.

crook !!
do you undeerstand it ???
can you tell us crackparroter
how is it that a physical entity that moves IN STRAIGHT LINES
can do any attraction force ???
hey pompus crackparroter

i hope you remember my Circlon' idea .....

??????
n o answer Eh ???
you can never answwer what is uncoveniet for you
----------------

since it is electromagnetic in nature.

???????

The fundamental energy is electromagnetic in nature.
See Maxwell's theory.

so what is electromagnetic energy made of
you know to use fire
but you dont know what fire is !!
you even dont understand and apparently unable to understand
about how much you dont understand !!!
and you pose to teacj me physics whiloe you are nothing but a parrot:

your electron that rotates around the nuc in an exact number of wave
lengths as in your site - is idiotic
because the electron does not rotate at all around the nuc !!
-----------

-------------

----------

Electrons have charge AND spin. They have both by
nature.

so waht is charge

Nobody knows what charge is.

if you dont know what is charge
how do you know that is an electromagnetic field??
you know some exxperimental facts about it
anmd can fiddle with some data tomake predictions
but nothing behind and in advance of it !!

and how and by waht means they word as they do
dont you think that 'modern physics' just take
some assumptions as for granted without *getting
into it deeper ??

Modern physics these days is the Copenhagen interpretation,
which means that it has made no progress since the 1930's
about the foundation.
----------
bravo!!
at last some honest relark !!!!
but you as well according to your site
didnt make progress as well !!
it is unpleasnt to you therefore
you quite Eh ??
a very cleave tactic ..........
----------

while that attitude prevents firther advance !!
(as a pupil of the French education and spirit
i think you should not be happy about the existing situation!

I am not a pupil of any French education and spirit.
I study the foundation. That's all.

actually i noticed that you are as well 'plaged' with some
nonconformism !!......)
------------

(by spreading soemthing of *itself* around himself ??)

* *in short Andre

just try and think how is it thatthe electron
can spread fields (that are certinly not mind ans spirit)
around itself

It doesn't "spread fields around itself" as you say.
It is these fields.

??????
i am sure you dont really understand what you wrote !!
-----------

it is a serious question not a joke .....
serious and obviously not properly solved !!
and leaving it unsolved or delusivly solved
prevents advance of science!!

As long as you believe it is not solved, you are
unlikely to try to understand the answers offered
you.

crook !!!
----------

on the other hand you pose to reach me
what they are by methematical formulas
that in manty cases lead to 'findings of
W and Z bosons !!!!

I have no idea what you are talking about.
Never talked about W and Z bosons.

---------------
of course youi dont understand!!

thje current attraction forces understandings
BY PHOTONS leaded to the
CROOCKISH THEORY of the W and Z
virtual photons
-----------------


you cant old the string on both its edges
now instead that you willteach me
i will teach you ::

suplying some mathematical presentations
of a physical phenonene is not a completer
understanding of it
let me lend you a methapho

our situation about it is as the fire stoty:
people knew how to use fire thousands of years ago
BUT THEY DIDNT KNOW WAHT IT IS AND GOOD ENOUGH WHAT ARE THE DEEPER
PROCESSES
OF *IT
*it was only after the deaper understanding
of the chemical process and partners that take place *in it
that
listen carefully
IT WAS ONLTY THEN THAT THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE COULD BE
INVENTED!!

*got it pompy ??
got the meaning of deaper understanding !!
including the practical meaning ??

so dont pose that patronizing pose of youself
and start to be more humble about physics understandings
because you can still get
some physics lessons form me *as well
about say
nuclear and Atomic structure !!!!!!!!!!
and the outcome of that knowlwdge !!
i hope that both of us undesrand what i mean .....

Well, you asked me questions and I gave you
my answers.

those are vert poor answers !!

I don't really understand where
you are leading the conversation since you
seem to think that I am patronizing you.

i dont mind very much you personally
i though t for a while that you are a bit less a crackparroter ..and
i thought for a while we could have some more
common lagguage
but you disaponted meonce more .
and in a way you are a bit less (imho)
but not enough!!

Not so. I have more interesting things to do
than patronizing people. So I guess this
will be the end of our little conversation.
-------------------------
that was always your 'cleaver' tactics
toquit while you have no good enough answers

for me it is enough tha this converation was followed
by some other people
so it was not in vane

kep well
Y.Porat


André Michaud 2
you didnt answer if you understood my
'Circlon' *idea !!

3
again you admitted that no one really understand what is a field !!
soplease dont forget your statement about it !!
and dont foerget waht are the conclutions of that
admittance
(just if you ddint understand the conclutions:
if that is the situation it must be first
a
be asserted again and again (mainly foer the young generation)
in order of looking for better understanding
and no t *to stay ion the smugg idiotic situation

b
make more efforts for better and deeper undertanding!!

TIA
Y.Porat
----------------------