Aether Regained <[email protected]> wrote or quoted:
| The
|evidence for the positron is a lot stronger than the evidence for say
|quarks.

We probably shouldn't think of these particles as something out
there on their own. They're more like tools we came up with so
we could build devices that work off those ideas. So, it's really
about whether a certain particle actually /comes in handy/.

The positron turned out to be pretty useful. Just look at the PET
(Positron Emission Tomography) scanner. There's a lot of solid proof
that PET scanners have helped save lives by letting doctors spot
how diseases are moving along and see if treatments are working.

(We look back now and think folks way back were clueless for
believing planets moved around the sun on /epicycles/. But
honestly, the ancient astronomers who came up with epicycles
- like Apollonius of Perga, Hipparchus, and especially Ptolemy -
didn't actually buy into that! They knew those were just /handy
tools/ for figuring out where the planets would be later on.)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 7/5/25 12:43, Stefan Ram wrote:

Aether Regained <[email protected]> wrote or quoted:
| The
|evidence for the positron is a lot stronger than the evidence for say |quarks.

We probably shouldn't think of these particles as something out
there on their own. They're more like tools we came up with so
we could build devices that work off those ideas. So, it's really
about whether a certain particle actually /comes in handy/.

The positron turned out to be pretty useful. Just look at the PET
(Positron Emission Tomography) scanner. There's a lot of solid proof
that PET scanners have helped save lives by letting doctors spot
how diseases are moving along and see if treatments are working.

(We look back now and think folks way back were clueless for
believing planets moved around the sun on /epicycles/. But
honestly, the ancient astronomers who came up with epicycles
- like Apollonius of Perga, Hipparchus, and especially Ptolemy -
didn't actually buy into that! They knew those were just /handy
tools/ for figuring out where the planets would be later on.)

At some point I think the word 'weak' needs to be used a lot also.

A 'strong force' is supposed to hold all of the 'protons' together
in the 'nucleus'. (And what does a quantum duck say, 'quark, quark'.)

I guess a 'weak force' allows the decay of a 'neutron' into a
'proton and an electron' (and a 'neutrino'). (Or something like
that).


--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: sci.physics.relativity, sci.math

On 7/8/2025 10:00 PM, Aether Regained wrote:

Physical evidence is of course primary,

Any "physical evidence" for that nonsensical
wishful thinking?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: sci.physics.relativity, sci.math

When protons get bashed up by electrons lots of weird stuff get around.
A positron is one such. A small proton just as a muon is a heavy
electron.

Could happen when a neutron (a proton electron pair) gets bashed up. The electron becomes fatter and the proton mutates to positron

Woof woof woof-woof woof woof-woof woof

Bertietaylor

--

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: sci.physics.relativity, sci.math

When you bust a neutron you get positrons and muons. That happens
naturally in the Sun and artificially on Earth.

Woof woof

Bertietaylor

--

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: sci.physics.relativity, sci.math

E is mcc crap put into simple radioactive process to confuse matters
such as neutrino, anti or otherwise. Hoax.

WOOF woof-woof woof woof woof-woof

Bertietaylor

--

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)