Re: Bertietaylor 's formula

In sci.physics Bertitaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:

On Tue, 1 Jul 2025 23:47:29 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
 

In sci.physics Bertitaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:

On Tue, 1 Jul 2025 18:34:05 +0000, Paul.B.Andersen wrote:
>

Den 01.07.2025 02:01, skrev Bertitaylor:

On Mon, 30 Jun 2025 19:23:07 +0000, Paul.B.Andersen wrote:
>

Den 30.06.2025 11:57, skrev Bertitaylor:

>
comprehend that we have posited that a neutron is a tight electron
proton.

>
β− decay is when a neutron in the core changes to a proton
by emitting an electron.
You claim that this proves that a neutron is a proton and
an electron in tight bond.
>
β+ decay is when a proton in the core changes to a neutron
by emitting a positron.

>
>
No such animal as a positron so it accepts an electron to become a
neutron.

>
OK. That settles it.

>
Yes. Positrons are Harry Potter stuff at the kindest. Basically, fraud
stuff by the Einsteinian confidence tricksters.

>
There is no way you can be unaware of the existence of the positron,

>
>
Huh, we have heard of Harry Potter and seen his films but we are sure he
does not exist in reality. Like positrons that have no real existence.

>
Unlike Harry Potter, there are literally many thousands of people that
have looked for and verified the existance of positrons crackpot.

 
Just as billions of people may swear Harry Potter exists as they have
seen him trillions of times on movies and TV and in sacred texts.

No, billions of people will not swear Harry Potter exists as sane people
can tell the difference between fantasy and reality, quite unlike you
crackpot.

The only people that will swear Harry Potter exists are small children
and the delusionally insane, such as you crackpot.

>
And that doesn't count the roughly 2 million positron emission
tomography scans performed each year in just the US crackpot.

 
Computer art and lies can claim anything.

Which has nothing whatsoever to do with PET scans crackpot.

<snip remaining crackpottery>


--
penninojim@yahoo.com