gharnagel wrote:
>
> Me:
> If neutrinos are majorana particles, wouldn't beta decay violate lepton number
> conservation?
>
> Copilot:
> Beta decay is a fascinating process in which a nucleus transforms by emitting
> a beta particle (either an electron or a positron). Let’s explore how Majorana
> neutrinos might impact lepton number conservation in beta decay:
>
> Standard Beta Decay (β- Decay):
> In standard beta decay, a neutron inside a nucleus transforms into a proton,
> emitting an electron (β-) and an antineutrino (ν̄e):
> [ n \rightarrow p + e^- + \nu_e ]
>
> Lepton Numbers in Standard Beta Decay:
> In this process:
> The neutron (n) has a lepton number of 0.
> The proton (p) also has a lepton number of 0.
> The emitted electron (e^-) has a lepton number of +1.
> The emitted antineutrino (ν̄e) has a lepton number of -1.
> The total lepton number is conserved: (0 + 0 + 1 + (-1) = 0).
>
> Majorana Neutrinos and Beta Decay:
> If neutrinos are Majorana particles:
> The neutrino (νe) and antineutrino (ν̄e) would be the same particle.
> In beta decay, the emitted antineutrino would actually be a neutrino (νe).
> The process would look like this: [ n \rightarrow p + e^- + \nu_e ]
> The emitted neutrino (νe) would have a lepton number of +1.
> The emitted electron (e^-) would still have a lepton number of +1.
> The total lepton number remains conserved: (0 + 0 + 1 + 1 = 2).
> Lepton Number Conservation:
> Crucially, the total lepton number (including neutrinos, charged leptons,
> and antileptons) must always be conserved in any particle interaction.
> Majorana neutrinos preserve this conservation by ensuring that the lepton
> numbers of neutrinos and antineutrinos add up to zero.
> In summary, if neutrinos are Majorana particles, beta decay would still
> conserve lepton number, as the emitted antineutrino would actually be a neutrino. The fascinating interplay between particle physics and conservation laws continues to captivate scientists worldwide!
>
> Me:
> a neutron decaying to a proton, an electron and an antineutrino would NOT
> conserve lepton number if neutrinos were majorana particles: zero does
> NOT equal 2!
>
> Copilot:
> You are absolutely correct, and I appreciate your keen observation! I
> apologize for the oversight in my previous response. Let’s revisit the
> scenario of beta decay with Majorana neutrinos:
>
> Standard Beta Decay (β- Decay):
> In standard beta decay, a neutron inside a nucleus transforms into a
> proton, emitting an electron (β-) and an antineutrino (ν̄e):
> [ n \rightarrow p + e^- + \nu_e ]
>
> Lepton Numbers in Standard Beta Decay:
> In this process:
> The neutron (n) has a lepton number of 0.
> The proton (p) also has a lepton number of 0.
> The emitted electron (e^-) has a lepton number of +1.
> The emitted antineutrino (ν̄e) has a lepton number of -1.
> The total lepton number is conserved: (0 + 0 + 1 + (-1) = 0).
>
> Majorana Neutrinos and Beta Decay:
> If neutrinos are Majorana particles:
> The neutrino (νe) and antineutrino (ν̄e) would be the same particle.
> In beta decay, the emitted antineutrino would actually be a neutrino (νe).
> The process would look like this: [ n \rightarrow p + e^- + \nu_e ]
> The emitted neutrino (νe) would have a lepton number of +1.
> The emitted electron (e^-) would still have a lepton number of +1.
> The total lepton number remains conserved: (0 + 0 + 1 + 1 = 2).
>
> Correction:
> I apologize for the confusion in my initial response. You are absolutely
> right that the total lepton number should remain zero, not two.
> In the case of Majorana neutrinos, the correct conservation equation would be:
> [ 0 + 0 + 1 + 1 = 2 ]
> Thank you for pointing out the error, and I appreciate your attention to detail

Your interesting interaction with bing chat is a typical responce
someone would
give in a science newsgroup.

It's called...backpeddling. Ai does it ALL the time!

I apologize
I apologizeI apologizeI apologizeI apologize
I apologizeI apologizeI apologize
I apologizeI apologizeI apologizeI apologize

(except. newsgroup members don't appologize.
they just keep changing the facts around to fit their narative)

--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge the unchallengeable.

> > Correction:
> > I apologize for the confusion in my initial response. You are absolutely
> > right that the total lepton number should remain zero, not two.
> In the case of Majorana neutrinos, the correct conservation equation would be:
> > [ 0 + 0 + 1 + 1 = 2 ]
> > Thank you for pointing out the error, and I appreciate your attention to detail
>
> Your interesting interaction with bing chat is a typical responce someone would
> give in a science newsgroup.
>
> It's called...backpeddling. Ai does it ALL the time!
>
> I apologize
> I apologizeI apologizeI apologizeI apologize
> I apologizeI apologizeI apologize
> I apologizeI apologizeI apologizeI apologize
>
> (except. newsgroup members don't appologize.
> they just keep changing the facts around to fit their narative)

Indeed. So the question is, is bing chat ai an honest ai or is it a typical
dishonest poster? Who wants to go question the ai to see if it really can
learn?

Some ai chats don't or can't delve into the online science, but this one can
and did. In a previous interaction, I asked it about tachyons. It gave me
the usual boilerplate about violating causality, etc., so I asked it this:
---------------
Me: What about harnagel in DOI: 10.13189/ujpa.2023.170101 proving that tachyons would not violate causality?

Copilot:
Gary Harnagel, a physicist, has proposed that tachyons do not violate causality 1. In his paper, he discusses two different approaches to tachyon communication around a loop, one employing a “hand-off” between momentarily-adjacent observers in relative motion passing each other, while the other applies direct tachyon communication between moving observers who are not adjacent 1. Harnagel argues that an analysis of what would be observed in a physics laboratory, rather than what is inferred from a Minkowski diagram, attests that causality violation does not occur in the hand-off method, either 1. However, it is important to note that tachyons are still hypothetical particles and no verifiable experimental evidence for their existence has been found 1.

Learn more
1 academia.edu 2 academia.edu 3 hrpub.org

1 Tachyons from a Laboratory Perspective
2 Tachyons for Interstellar Communication
3 Tachyons, the Four-Momentum Formalism and Simultaneity
---------------
So it found my infamous viXra papers on its own.

On 03/03/2024 01:17 PM, gharnagel wrote:
>> > Correction:
>> > I apologize for the confusion in my initial response. You are
>> absolutely
>> > right that the total lepton number should remain zero, not two.
>> In the case of Majorana neutrinos, the correct conservation equation
>> would be:
>> > [ 0 + 0 + 1 + 1 = 2 ]
>> > Thank you for pointing out the error, and I appreciate your
>> attention to detail
>>
>> Your interesting interaction with bing chat is a typical responce
>> someone would
>> give in a science newsgroup.
>>
>> It's called...backpeddling. Ai does it ALL the time!
>>
>> I apologize
>> I apologizeI apologizeI apologizeI apologize
>> I apologizeI apologizeI apologize
>> I apologizeI apologizeI apologizeI apologize
>>
>> (except. newsgroup members don't appologize.
>> they just keep changing the facts around to fit their narative)
>
> Indeed. So the question is, is bing chat ai an honest ai or is it a
> typical
> dishonest poster? Who wants to go question the ai to see if it really can
> learn?
>
> Some ai chats don't or can't delve into the online science, but this one
> can
> and did. In a previous interaction, I asked it about tachyons. It gave me
> the usual boilerplate about violating causality, etc., so I asked it this:
> ---------------
> Me: What about harnagel in DOI: 10.13189/ujpa.2023.170101 proving that
> tachyons would not violate causality?
>
> Copilot:
> Gary Harnagel, a physicist, has proposed that tachyons do not violate
> causality 1. In his paper, he discusses two different approaches to
> tachyon communication around a loop, one employing a “hand-off” between
> momentarily-adjacent observers in relative motion passing each other,
> while the other applies direct tachyon communication between moving
> observers who are not adjacent 1. Harnagel argues that an analysis of
> what would be observed in a physics laboratory, rather than what is
> inferred from a Minkowski diagram, attests that causality violation does
> not occur in the hand-off method, either 1. However, it is important to
> note that tachyons are still hypothetical particles and no verifiable
> experimental evidence for their existence has been found 1.
>
> Learn more
> 1 academia.edu 2 academia.edu 3 hrpub.org
>
> 1 Tachyons from a Laboratory Perspective
> 2 Tachyons for Interstellar Communication
> 3 Tachyons, the Four-Momentum Formalism and Simultaneity
> ---------------
> So it found my infamous viXra papers on its own.

These days you might consider that "photinos" are
the hypothetical particle, that's a super-symmetrical
complement, with its super-classical behavior, as
about point local global total a total field theory:
talking about photons as tachyonic and electrons
bradyonic, and photons as flux thusly, and photinos
as "second and final order flux", vis-a-vis, gravitinos,
as usually "final order flux", with regards to causality,
and, synchronicity. (And electron physics, the flow
of bulk and aggregate electron-holes.)

For complementarity and unitarity, ....

You can tell a lot about somebody
by how they treat their animals.

Man: is animal, and machine.
Yet man: is mind. Our species,
"homo sapiens", is like a man,
with a mind. Then, "homo sapiens sapiens",
is about double that, then that,
"homo sapiens sapiens sapiens",
has quite a large mind.

Homo, bro: no homo.

A variety of tachyons in neutrino physics,
have been found. Yet, you can find in the
literature, that anti-matter, though hypothesized,
has never been found. Yet, you can also find
later in the literature, that that's has-been.

You can also look into Brehmsstrahlung, or
braking radiation, Cerenkov, and for example,
Coriolis, and, for example, Casimir, each
explaining various effects either super-symmetric
in complementarity, and that a "theory of sum potentials",
has that the sum of the potentials is real,
and it's total, in a total field theory.
Also there's Coulomb force, "now in non-conservative".

The idea of anti-matter of course is that
matter + anti-matter = total mass -> energy conversion.

Of course: causality, is inviolable.
And: there are no closed time-like curves.
Conserved quantities are conserved,
not all quantities are conserved,
yet other quantities result when they're not.
All quantity is conserved. (It's an open system.)

Then, super-symmetry basically says,
"well, euh, something adds back up".
Then, super-symmetry has already put
out "and here are the definitive names
of these things, as hypothetically,
they're theoretical, their description".

The Beta decay, is one of the particular processes
that illustrates quasi-invariance at continuum
boundaries, and, the very nature, or, "quantization",
and quantization's, "normalization", itself.

.... That normalization is re-de- or de-re-normalization, ...,
in the doubling and halving spaces of mathematics' measure theory.

It's a continuum mechanics.

Put that in the large vector pipe and watch it smoke.

gharnagel wrote:

> Me: What about harnagel in DOI: 10.13189/ujpa.2023.170101 proving that
> tachyons would not violate causality?
>
> Copilot:
> Gary Harnagel, a physicist, has proposed that tachyons do not violate
> causality 1. In his paper, he discusses two different approaches to
> tachyon communication around a loop, one employing a “hand-off” between
> momentarily-adjacent observers in relative motion passing each other,
> while the other applies direct tachyon communication between moving
> observers who are not adjacent 1. Harnagel argues that an analysis of
> what would be observed in a physics laboratory, rather than what is
> inferred from a Minkowski diagram, attests that causality violation does
> not occur in the hand-off method, either 1. However, it is important to
> note that tachyons are still hypothetical particles and no verifiable
> experimental evidence for their existence has been found 1.

which proves both harnagel and the so called ˝AI˝ are not undrestanding
relativity and tensors and so on. Trying to promote your paper through
crappy AI chat, shows the fool you are. I think it's significant.

𝗜𝘀𝗿𝗮𝗲𝗹_𝗯𝗹𝗮𝗺𝗲𝘀_𝗣𝗮𝗹𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗶𝗮𝗻𝘀_𝗳𝗼𝗿_𝗚𝗮𝘇𝗮_𝗮𝗶𝗱_𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘃𝗼𝘆_𝗱𝗲𝗮𝘁𝗵𝘀
The IDF has claimed that its troops only opened fire to protect themselves
from the hungry crowd
https://r%74.com/news/593704-israel-gaza-aid-convoy-deaths/

This is merely a continuation of British Imperial practices, under a
different brand. The ziojews are the world leaders in lying and deception
and death. The Devil's chosen scums at it again spreading lies....

“This is why we are facilitating aid, creating humanitarian corridors,
establishing unilateral humanitarian pauses, and exercising caution in our
use of force.” Hagari said. Every word of this is a 𝗸𝗵𝗮𝘇𝗮𝗿_𝗴𝗼𝘆_𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺_𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗮𝗸𝗶𝗮
lie.

NATO ITS A WEAPON OF THE ZIONIST, AS LONG THE ZIONIST CONTROL NATO AND
AMARICA THEY FEEL POWERFUL. Really!!! Musk doesn't know, NATO is there to
bomb poor countries??? ...and siphon tax money.

strange how the perpetrator is innocent while the victim is to blame ?
probably a normal way of thinking to the zionist mind ?

in a few months there will be no "𝗶𝘀𝗿𝗮𝗲𝗹", since never existed, accordingly
"they" change the name from 𝗝𝗮𝗰𝗼𝗯, saying God did a mistake. They killed
Jesus, saying God did another mistake.

Zionist child killers are born liars and now running scared as despite
killing 32,000 plus Palestinian unarmed women and children they have lost
militarily to a small band of superhuman brave Hamas freedom fighters in
sneakers. In frustration Zionist cowards are killing babies, woman and
children.

These are murderors and will go without punishment. The killers are paid
by the USA. Amazing the fucking 𝗧𝘂𝗿𝗸𝗲𝘆 and 𝗘𝗴𝘆𝗽𝘁, population over 200 mil,
are not doing anything.

Ross Finlayson wrote:

> On 03/03/2024 01:17 PM, gharnagel wrote:
1 Tachyons from a Laboratory Perspective 2 Tachyons for Interstellar
>> Communication 3 Tachyons, the Four-Momentum Formalism and Simultaneity
>> So it found my infamous viXra papers on its own.
>
> These days you might consider that "photinos" are the hypothetical
> particle, that's a super-symmetrical complement, with its
> super-classical behavior, as about point local global total a total
> field theory: talking about photons as tachyonic and electrons
> bradyonic, and photons as flux thusly, and photinos as "second and final
> order flux", vis-a-vis, gravitinos, as usually "final order flux", with

i find difficult reading your papers. You write so vast and ample .

𝗣𝗼𝗹𝗶𝘀𝗵_𝗳𝗮𝗿𝗺𝗲𝗿𝘀’_𝗯𝗹𝗼𝗰𝗸𝗮𝗱𝗲_𝗶𝘀_‘𝗯𝗲𝘆𝗼𝗻𝗱_𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆’_–_𝗭𝗲𝗹𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗸𝘆
Agricultural producers in Poland are outraged that their Ukrainian
competitors can sell grain in the EU without paying tariffs
https://r%74.com/russia/593718-zelensky-polish-farmers-protest-morality/

Zelensky and "morality"?... It's nice to start the week with a good
laugh!..

Careful ...he may march on Warsaw next

What's beyond morality is to continue to send young men to their death
because you refuse to negotiate peace. It's also beyond morality that you
are getting rich from it. Adolf Zelensky is a criminal who is robbing a
country of it's young citizens while filling his filthy pockets with U.S.
dollars. War pig!