I can not post copyrighted material but I can give the link to it. This
theory seems to explain the gap between quantum physics and relativity.
Yes, it is my theory and yes im posting it because I want to tell
others what I believe. Nothing wrong with that. Here is the links to a
simple pic which explains my theory.

http://members.fortunecity.com/reactor1967/btheory.jpg
or
http://www.geocities.com/reactor1967/btheory.jpg

If you want to visit the websight itself knock off the btheory.jpg
part. I don,t get many good comments and about the sight so don,t get
excited to see it. But, I believe my Unified field theory is in the
ball park.

Thank you for your time. Lloyd Burris

Lloyd Burris wrote:
I can not post copyrighted material but I can give the link to it. This
theory seems to explain the gap between quantum physics and relativity.
Yes, it is my theory and yes im posting it because I want to tell
others what I believe. Nothing wrong with that. Here is the links to a
simple pic which explains my theory.

http://members.fortunecity.com/reactor1967/btheory.jpg
or
http://www.geocities.com/reactor1967/btheory.jpg

If you want to visit the websight itself knock off the btheory.jpg
part. I don,t get many good comments and about the sight so don,t get
excited to see it. But, I believe my Unified field theory is in the
ball park.

Thank you for your time. Lloyd Burris

The picture and the text below it shows nicely that you have no clue
of most of the physics of the 20th century, and you don't understand
science. (and can't even spell correctly)

Thanks for playing.


Bye,
Bjoern

get a decent site

get a spellchecker

get a clue

Lloyd Burris wrote:

I can not post copyrighted material but I can give the link to it. This
theory seems to explain the gap between quantum physics and relativity.
Yes, it is my theory and yes im posting it because I want to tell
others what I believe. Nothing wrong with that. Here is the links to a
simple pic which explains my theory.
[snip]

Hopeless bull****, still. First post was the wrok of a half-wit.
Now, you proceed in kind.

--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf

"Lloyd Burris" wrote in message
...
I can not post copyrighted material but I can give the link to it. This
theory seems to explain the gap between quantum physics and relativity.

It's not a theory at this point. It's at best an hypothesis.

Let us know what happens after experimentation to verify if it works the way
it says it should.

Bjoern Feuerbacher wrote in
:

Lloyd Burris wrote:
I can not post copyrighted material but I can give the link to it.
This theory seems to explain the gap between quantum physics and
relativity. Yes, it is my theory and yes im posting it because I want
to tell others what I believe. Nothing wrong with that. Here is the
links to a simple pic which explains my theory.

http://members.fortunecity.com/reactor1967/btheory.jpg
or
http://www.geocities.com/reactor1967/btheory.jpg

If you want to visit the websight itself knock off the btheory.jpg
part. I don,t get many good comments and about the sight so don,t get
excited to see it. But, I believe my Unified field theory is in the
ball park.

Thank you for your time. Lloyd Burris

The picture and the text below it shows nicely that you have no clue
of most of the physics of the 20th century, and you don't understand
science. (and can't even spell correctly)

Thanks for playing.


Bye,
Bjoern


Well, since you can not make a valid argument for or against my theory
proving anything I can only judge you as a wanna be. Thank you for
bringing my spelling to my attention even us scientist are not perfect.
For yourself I suggest you learn how to give a valid argument. Science
is full of people like you repeating the same old dogma and not being
able to back it up with valid arguments. The mark of a true person of
science is being able to construct a valid argument for or against
something. You my friend do not belong here but hey its free world
right? Its because of people like you science is not making as many
leaps as it use to. Please go back and play with your toys and let the
grownups talk. Thank you for playing. Lloyd Burris

"Lloyd" wrote in message
...

Well, since you can not make a valid argument for or against my theory
proving anything I can only judge you as a wanna be. Thank you for
bringing my spelling to my attention even us scientist are not perfect.

You don't HAVE a theory. You have... again, at best an hypothesis. So the
spelling on your site, as well as the fact that physics tells us that your
hypothesis is not going to hack it are very valid arguments against your
hypothesis.

For yourself I suggest you learn how to give a valid argument. Science

I would suggest you learn the difference between a theory in science and an
hypothesis.