'm upraised you guys lasted this long. Now he’s just making shit up on the fly with a few of his favorite key words. It’s like a deranged Turing test.
Probably, yes.
Yes, you’ve finally got it.
Your “theory” is analogous to you buying a typewriter, hitting keys at random for a few hours, then claiming to be a great novelist on the basis that arranging the letters into coherent sentences is just a job for a word technician.
(The usual identity of the random key-striker in typewriter analogies is purely coincidental.)
proton = particle that does not attract to the negative or the positive charged plate, while it may have a charge it is not being pulled in either direction as it moves between the two plates, neutron = particle void of any charge, so it is attracted to the positive plate as it accepts a charge. Electron = a charge free of any particle, it is attracted to the negative plate. You see, when they named the particles, the science was not really established. When they smashed their atoms and tried to describe what they were seeing, the displaced space around the atom collapsed and any charge was released and was attracted to the negative plate, they called it an electron and said it was negative charged due to its attraction to the negative plate. The particles with no charge were attracted to the positively charged plate as they could accept a charge and appeared to have more mass, they called them protons and gave them a positive designation due to their attraction to the positive plate. and occasionally later on, they discovered some particles had a charge that ranged somewhere in between, and were not attracted to either plate, they called those particles neutrons, If they had known what they where actually seeing and the reason they might have named them differently, because its all very confusing today. We have a bunch of people who actually think their is a mysterious opposite and equal negative charge to a positive charge, and so they make up all kinds of crazy theories about dark energy or dark matter, then parade around preaching their idea as if it were gospel, when they don’t really understand that electricity only moves in one direction, or an opposite direction, depending on which side you have your positive and negative connected too. and there is no equal and opposite negative charge.
and I’m done with you people too.
Yes, you should dedicate your valuable time to all those other people who are listening to you and taking you seriously. Or, perhaps, your day job.
But you were winning!
Does anyone know what actual experiment he’s describing here?
Huh. Today I learned that:
- Protons have no electric charge;
- Neutrons have no charge and are thus attracted to positive charges. Also, they have a charge that ranges somewhere between positive and negative, because reasons.
- There is only one particle with a negative, positive, and zero charge: the electron, proton, and neutron, respectively. Except that there aren’t any positive charges.
- Particles are never created or destroyed, but are rather released from bound states by squeezing them.
- Electrons are free charges without any particles, which makes sense.
- Positive charges (e^+, I guess?) don’t exist.
- Dark matter participates in the electromagnetic interaction, and that was the point of proposing it.
- Electricity only moves in one direction (south, I guess?), except when it doesn’t and moves in the opposite direction (so, north?).
- Even if I’ve given up on talking to our new friend, it’s still fun to point and laugh at his PHIsics.
Some kind of neurological exam to test for damage to his Broca’s?
Finally, somebody gets it. Perhaps you could sort out all the math now?
You’ve performed this experiment in a lab/garage/attic?
Can you share with us your actual hypothesis, describe the type of equipment needed/used, along with your methodology and actual results?
Didn’t you read the rest of the thread:
[QUOTE=The OP, elsewhere]
I think it would be S / V x M = U, surface divided by vacuum times mass equals universe?
[/QUOTE]
What part of “surface divided by vacuum times mass equals universe” don’t you understand? If you want concrete numbers, then using Mantraphilter’s Equation for a standard hydrogen atom gives a universe of 3.5 x 10[SUP]10[/SUP] m[SUP]2[/SUP] kg / vacuum, which agrees with experiment.
No. Math is bad. Like Indexed lists are bad. Here are thirteen reasons why indexed lists and numbers are bad. Number 9 will shock you.
Look, maybe Einstein’s theory is still the best ever. But MANTRAPHILTER’s theory is definitely Number 2.
Finally. Someone with the courage to say what we’ve all been thinking. 
nm - posting error
If only every participant in this thread were so diligent in reviewing the content of their posts.
protons have a varying degree of charge, the protons that are neutral in the electric field between the two plates are the particles that were mistakenly called neutrons
again, the problem is people have been misled by the incorrect language of physics, and the belief that the electron because of it’s negative designation is some sort of opposite charge of the positive proton and it is not. Energy is all positive weather or not it is stored in a particle or not. By your thinking, if you removed the charge out of a proton it would then be a negative charge. like your so called negative electron, and it would not be. If you remove the charge from a proton you then have a charge free of any particle, It would not be a negative charge, it would be the same as my positive charge electron. this is why you are wrong to call an electron a negatively charged particle its misleading and confusing and has caused a lot of problems in the understanding of actual physics.