Re: Lousy non culture follows bogus physics

Bertitaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:

On Fri, 11 Jul 2025 3:56:38 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
 

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

On Sat, 5 Jul 2025 19:32:00 +0000, Aether Regained wrote:
>

Bertitaylor:> On Fri, 4 Jul 2025 19:46:00 +0000, Aether Regained wrote:

>
@Arindam aka @Bertietaylor,
>
What makes you so confidently dismiss the positron? Aren't cloud chamber
traces like the ones below irrefutable proof of positrons:

>
We don't see any need for the positron in the universe for the
explanation of its workings.
>
As for cloud chamber stuff it shows not just positrons but also Hell
knows how many so called fundamental particles. All as useless as
positrons. Hocus pocus.
>

>
True, there is a particle zoo out there. Andrew Pickering's
"Constructing Quarks" and Alexander Unzicker's "The Higgs Fake" go in
depth into this topic. But, just for this reason, throwing out the
positron is like "throwing out the baby with the bath water". The
evidence for the positron is a lot stronger than the evidence for say
quarks.

>
Hell, no. All the particle bashing stuff using expensive equipment shows
that you can bash up protons into smaller pieces.

>
Is the reason you disparage expensive equipment that you can't afford
any equipment Arindam?

 
Arindam had enough money to buy and enough talent to make the equipment
he needed to prove his new physics. Genius is hindered by lying
mediocrities who hide behind huge spends of public money.

If you mean your low speed pipe roller with a ruler for instrumentation,
that proved nothing other than you don't know how to do an experiment
Arindam.


--
penninojim@yahoo.com