On Mar 27, 9:36 pm, wrote:
On Mar 27, 2:17 pm, " wrote:



On Mar 25, 7:24 pm, wrote:

Mesons are quark anti quark pairs. This makes them a matter anti
matter mixture.

Hard to call quarks or antiquarks "matter" since they can't exist
alone. Other than that quibble...okay...

The anti neutron would be 3 anti quarks with NEGATIVE strong force.
Since there is NO ANTI strong force their can be no anti neutron or
anti quarks.

That's like saying there's no such thing as "anti-electricity" so
there can't be such a thing as a battery with two oppositely charged
poles.

Quite silly. There's no need to assume antiquarks would produce an
"antistrong" force.

In proton anti proton colliders strong matter comes out when there
should be some radiation from ANIHALATION from the matter anti matter
(even if it is risidual.) This is what anti matter theory predicts:
Radiation. This is not what is seen to happen. Anti matter theory was
originally a hole in Dirac's electron equation. Anti matter is not
real.

What's "strong matter" supposed to be?

Oh, and where did you get the notion that colliding protons and
antiprotons doesn't generate annihilation radiation?

Positronium has a positron that has atomic shells around it. This is
poppycock.

No, it has "orbitals" around it which an electron can occupy.
Similarly, an electron has orbitals a positron can occupy. If you look
at both of them as deBroglie wave phenomena it's fairly obvious that
it has to be that way.

The way anrti matter is considered to be captured also shows of its
impossibility. Cosmic rays of anti protons and anti electrons will
interact strongly with the protons and electrons in the atmposphere. I
have calculated there would be 400 quadrillion points of possible
anihalation for the proton and electron passing through the atmosphere
to be captured by the collider.

Well, you're obviously wrong.

Mark L. Fergerson

There is opposite electric charge.

Yup.

Not so for the strong force.

How do you know this? What supporting evidence have you?

This conclusively disproves anti matter theory.

Saying a thing doesn't make it so. Where's your evidence?


Mark L. Fergerson

wrote:


Mitch Raemsch Twice Nobel Laureate 2008

And it's so early in the year 2008 still. With all these great theories
you're cranking out (you don't have any experimental data, do you?),
you're bound to be awarded even more Nobel Laureates before the year is out.

On Mar 26, 5:24*am, wrote:
Mesons are quark anti quark pairs. This makes them a matter anti
matter mixture.

The anti neutron would be 3 anti quarks with NEGATIVE strong force.
Since there is NO ANTI strong force their can be no anti neutron or
anti quarks.

In proton anti proton colliders strong matter comes out when there
should be some radiation from ANIHALATION from the matter anti matter
(even if it is risidual.) This is what anti matter theory predicts:
Radiation. This is not what is seen to happen. Anti matter theory was
originally a hole in Dirac's electron equation. Anti matter is not
real.

Positronium has a positron that has atomic shells around it. This is
poppycock.

The way anrti matter is considered to be captured also shows of its
impossibility. Cosmic rays of anti protons and anti electrons will
interact strongly with the protons and electrons in the atmposphere. I
have calculated there would be 400 quadrillion points of possible
anihalation for the proton and electron passing through the atmosphere
to be captured by the collider.

We are colliding protons with high energy protons. That is all.

Mitch Raemsch Twice Nobel Laureate 2008
===============================================
To Mitch Raemsch Twice Nobel Laureate 2008
===.
1.
When Light quantum which fly with constant
speed c=1 stops its moving we call it anti matter.
2.
When Electron interact with Vacuum
we call it anti matter too.
3.
It is only my interpretation the laws of Physics. .
4.
I also hope to be Twice Nobel Laureate next year.
5.
Best wishes.
===================