4 ms·
Those mangeled protons are not anti-protons. They are not stable but only a Proton with damaged outer shell (the one that breaks at 5 MeV). Get it stable like t
by poelzi 7y ago
Those mangeled protons are not anti-protons. They are not stable but only a Proton with damaged outer shell (the one that breaks at 5 MeV). Get it stable like the Proton and we talk again.
When real antimatter gets destroyed it looks like this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Jupiter_impact_event https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Jupiter_impact_event
- ben_w 7y agoSigh. For your benefit more than mine, I’d like to make you aware that you sound like a Markov chain trained on science-sounding words, because those words don’t fit together in the order you have combined them.
- poelzi 7y agoIf you are so good, please explain me the black spot. I just follow quite different, more classical model that is not invented by me. What most people think is is a very bad truth function. I care about the number of assumptions required for a model and the number of papers falsifying it. I don't care if a paper praises how good prediction X fits, you have a infinite number of models that predicted exactly the same value. But through falsification you can sieve out the wrong ones and guess what, most of the models commonly proposed as "truth" are long falsified. The standard model is not even logically sound and combined with GR/SR highly paradoxical.