|
Sent: Monday, July 20, 2009 12:16 AM Subject: [Theoretical_Physics] Positronium and quarks Hi John Shadow or Tony or both ?
>Hi John!
>Any proposal
or questions you may harbour you are invited to share with the forum on theoretical_physics, where it will be addressed by
John Shadow
How the universe started .
Glad I have your attention . Wanted to bounce an idea for consideration
. I am going to redefine electron / positron annihilation . There is no science to this as I am simply making it up with the
sole goal of forcing the big bang to knit a fabric of space and sprinkle some hydrogen around . This is based on the notion
that the big bang started off with mostly electrons and positrons and ended up with what we see now . It is ironic but if
what I am about to say is true then there can not be a big bang ?
Hi John! It is commendable that you think deeply about fundamental issues in theoretical physics. I shall comment on your general ideas and provide feedback, which might be of interest to other scientific
philosophers. This forum in particular seems to have an extensive membership
base of contributors who I would call 'natural philosophers of the sciences. One
doesn't have to have science degrees to be such; but it doesn't harm to be informed about the topics one is interested
in to one's level of semantic understanding. Now
to your points in interspersion. There is a large database about pair-production
and pair-annihilation in the scientific libraries. Positronium has been extensively analysed and studied and the leptogenesis
(and baryogenesis) of the Big Bang cosmogenesis has been extensively worked out. What is missing in a well-established and tested model like the Big Bang (despite the naysayers, who more
often than not do HAVE a valid point of critisism, BUT do not understand what the Big Bang cosmogonies presume and assume
and imply); is the quantum mechanics and the energy matrix, which ALLOWED this Big Bang to occur.
A major point in your thinking is this. You are attempting
to reduce this say preBig Bang Matrix (or Planck-Singularity background) to a positronium soup of sorts. This is called
the quark-gluon plasma by the pundits and to analyse your ideas in detail, you should familiarise yourself with what this
quark-gluon plasma is in the standard models. But here are some general prerequisites,
which are needed for positronium to exist. Positronium
is a BOSONIC energystate. It is either of 0-quantum spin (as parapositronium), where the constituent electron and positron
are antiparallel aligned. Or it is of 1-spin as orthopositronium, where the
quantum spins are parallel. The decay of positronium into FERMIONIC energystates
so either produces 2 antimomentum aligned photons (each of spin 1, so conserving momentum as 1-1=0) or a 3 photonjet, where
the momentum vectors sum to to 1. Now
for your cosmology to work, you require the matter-antimatter symmetry of the preBig Bang matrix to accomodate those positronium
selfstates from first principles. Can you see now, that you have already complicated
the issue? Where does the energy of
interaction to hold the positronium together derive from? Orthopositronium
lives longer, than parapositronium by a factor of the Alpha-Finestructure constant (~1/137) in about 100 nanoseconds to 1
nanosecond. But this alpha factor is
electromagnetic and so the positronium selfstates require electroweak unification (because the positronium has mass and so
interacts weakly AND electromagnetically). The electroweak unification occured
so 1/365 seconds into the Big Bang in the refined Quantum Big Bang Cosmology (such as Quantum Relativity). In the old model (the one you get in websearches, wiki etc.), the electroweak unification is earlier in
the microsecond ranges; but still too late to BE the energy matrix for the subsequent Planck-Black Body thermodynamic evolution
of the universe. So your positronium
model CANNOT be what you are hoping for. Hydrogen itself COULD NOT EXIST until
the background temperature had dropped to about 3000 Kelvin; as this is the temperature threshold, where the first atoms
are able to form in the electroweak interaction between kernel nucleons (comprised of quarks) and ringed-leptons (mainly electrons). In Quantum Relativity (QR), the standard model thermodynamics match
just about perfectly (though the displacements do not), so the 3000 K energy level applied to the BOSON statistic is coupled
to a timescale of so 1 million years and of the order of the well known decoupling standard of the photon-scatter, publisized
as the 400,000 year count after the Big Bang. Yet,
you have a valid point in a specific detail. The BOSONIC Unification in QR
defines a threshold at 2 nanoseconds and this IS the characteristic positronium decay time. So instead of questioning the Big Bang or Relativity or the Standard Model of Particle Physics or Quantum
Mechanics or QFT or QED or QCD or any other 'standard model'; you (and all the other dissidents) should question the
details of those models. The above is
an exemplary point. Your question should become: How are the positronium energy
states related to the electroweak unification; or something like that. Answering
(or attempting and contributing to) questions like this, will revolutionise theoretical physics and EXTEND all of the standard
models like Big Bang Cosmology, Relativity and Quantum Field Theory.
A possible way to make a transition from electrons and positrons
to a fabric of space with small amounts of hydrogen , Our early universe .
Stuff that is made up and therefore
should be taken with a grain of salt .
I feel you would rewrite the above, should you
have understood my commentary.
1] a electron and a positron may occupy the same place Not
as fermionic eigenstates; as bosonic eigenstates they are string-derivatives and massless and so they are multiplicative in
the preBig Bang matrix.
2] a electron may be next to , touching , a positron without annihilating
.
No, the electron and positrons are NOT particles, which you can geometrically distribute with fixed
positions (Pauli Exclusion and Heisenberg Uncertainty).
3 ] If a electron hits a positron
hard enough it will annihilate into a new particle of positronium plus gamma radiation to represent lost energy .
No,
when an electron annihilates with a positron, the energy inertial selfstate TRANSFORMS via m=E/c^2
<-> f=E/h. The applicable quantum geometry of this engages gauge blueprints, which relate to the quark-gluon plasma
of the standard models. For positronium to form, the leptons must 'capture' each other
in orbit. This orbit relates to the quarkian templates in the wavefunction of say a neutron decomposing in say the commonly
known beta decays of radioactivity.
4] once a electron / positron have formed positronium
they are in a confined state , stable state.
No, all positronium energy states are unstable and decay
via electromagnetic interaction. The positronium eigenstate is only the first (and of lowest energy)
of many quark-lepton eigenstates between matter and antimatter. The next one would be the J/PSI
quark-antiquark (ccbar) coupling of the CHARMONIUM energy eigenstate at about 3 GeV. 5 ]
a particle of positronium may be separated into the original electron / positron with 1 M volt . This fits the standard model
rather well and does not violate the conservation of energy .
The decay of positronium, as indicated
above, is electromagnetic and occurs spontaneously at the 1 MeV level as each lepton must conserve momentum and energy as
their restenergies of so 0.51 MeV. But IF the positronium constituent would have significatly higher
energy (like the J/PSI for example); THEN the decay products would include quark-antiquark couplings (mesons) as well as photons
(gamma rays), because of the electroweak coupling between mass-inertia and photon energy. The theory
writes itself from this point on . I say writes itself as once one makes stuff up there is a obligation to be consistently
obedient to it within the discipline of known physics .
What should happen very early in the big bang .
A electron will eventually hit a positron hard enough to cause annihilation which leads to a new particle of virtual positronium
. It should have a charge of zero and a mass of zero and be confined to this state by the positive and negative charges of
the electron and positron . A quasi virtual electron / positron is a good way to think of it . This happens over and over
again until the universe is filled with quasi virtual positronium . The fabric of space is now in place . The speed is now
limited to the the square root of density times stiffness of quasi virtual positronium . I like to call them VEPS for virtual
electron positron space .
Electron-Positron annihilation as you envison
it, requires the presence of the matter-antimatter symmetry (which the standard model cannot derive properly). Why? because there was NO matter-antimatter symmetry at the preBig Bang matrix. So again, your novice-approach has more to it, than the expert would
give you credit for. Because your basic notion of the massless positronium
eigenstate is CORRECT in the QR-model. But your 'virtual positronium'
is NOT inertial positronium at all, BUT it is part of the so called Heisenberg Vacuum background. This is the ONLY place where
the antimatter ever was, is and will exist. The pair-annihilation is not prior
the pair-production. It is the other way around. ONLY the so called Vacuum
can produce the antimatter and always in coupling to their matter partners. This is how all the mesons are generated from
a 'PURE ENERGY SELFSTATE'. And
your 'fabric of space' from the above becomes a good approximation for what the standard models call the Heisenberg
Vacuum or the Zero-Point-Field and what QR calls the preBig Bang 'stringbosonic' lightmatrix. Space is in place but we need hydrogen to get things started
. A single point event between a electron / positron leads to a fabric of space , VEPS ,and a single a point event between
positron , electron and another positron will lead to one proton of hydrogen . In short annihilation to a the confined state
of a electron , positron and positron is what 3 quarks are . If you apply this to the standard model it will knock your socks
off . The charges of quarks resolve themselves from 1/3 , 2/3 charges to charges of 1 . The resulting simplification is elegant
. The only particles left are the electron , positron and photon . All other parts of the standard model are a result of a
combination of those three fundamental parts . Anyways that is it . The universe from electrons and positrons to what we see
now .
I am losing my socks, as they have holes in it; but the standard model
is well enabled to accomodate your internal annihilations.
In the standard
model, the mechanistic view of quarks as billiard balls coupled by gluonic springs is highly misinformative. Your model again comes closer to the wavequarkian interpretation of the nucleonic finestructure as somehow
linking the decay products of the neutron to the elementary matrix of the (Zero-Point-Energy) ZPE. For this quantum geometry to work; the standard model's unitary symmetries SU(3) for the baryonic quarks;
SU(2) for the quark-antiquark mesons and U(1) for the photon gauge must all be accomodated and reproduce the 'particle-families'
in their respective permutation symmetries. And
you are basically correct in your final deduction. All of the universe's particles reduce to just one thing in the NEUTRON
template (though finestructured to generate the Higgs-Boson, the gauge transmitters, the neutrinos, gluons, photons,
weakons, gravitons etc.). This neutron template WAS TWINNED in the preBig
Bang matrix DOING AWAY with the need for antimatter; BECAUSE the doubled fermionic spin (1/2+1/2=1) could STRING the two FERMIONIC
MASSLESS stringstates into a BOSONIC GAUGE stringstate. You are closer to the relevant cosmology for the 21st century than you think. I feel that is why you became
so excited about your discovery. It
takes a while for this simpler notion of our universe to sink in . How would you rate this as a possibility .
See the above and I have attached an unfinished treatise about your field of interedst below for further (more
technical) information.John Well first of all thank you for responding in such a detailed way
. You have been successful as you have seeded doubts in my conclusions . Doubts are the road to knowledge . I will defend
some of my statements but it will read like a effort to support my own theory . You may trust that I have a greater scientific
honesty then that . I just want to pass some doubts back that you may or may not find useful . >>2] a electron
may be next to , touching , a positron without annihilating . >No, the electron and positrons are
NOT particles, which you can geometrically distribute with fixed positions (Pauli Exclusion and Heisenberg Uncertainty) . I will bribe the physics gods with the currency of redundancy to look the other way so that I
may know how fast and where . If the Heisenberg Uncertainty may be bribed then does it belong in the halls of science ? Circular accelerator with two probes inserted 10 feet apart and a burst of electrons going around . I want to know
where and how fast the electrons are going . with one measurement of the burst of electrons the Heisenberg Uncertainty holds
up as I do not know which electrons were measured therefore compromising both where and how fast information . However if
i repeat the measurement 1000 times then average it out I may make a correct prediction of how fast and where . To give this
argument balance I do not know which electron but the where and how fast will resolve itself to a much greater correctness
having bribed the physics gods with a averaging of the measurement . There are other examples where the currency of energy
may be used to bend the Heisenberg Uncertainty law . I see it as a human need for perfection on Heisenberg's part . Physics
must never have a agenda such as perfection . For this reason the where and how fast should not be considered as the only
haggling chips in physics as it is not that simple . The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle (HUP) describes
a number of proportionalities, such as between Energy and Time or between displacement and momentum. This then relates
Energy to Frequency in a 'wave nature' and Energy to Position in a 'particle nature' respectively. The analysis of the quantum electron so does not consider the electron to be a particle, except as a
specific outcome in its 'particle nature' and always correlated to its 'wave nature'. Therefore
the electron is described as a wavefunction, incorporating both 'natures' as a statistical distribution of energy
states. This is why basically all advanced analysis of physical dynamic systems engages series expansion
of the observed physical parameters. The appropriateness for this is evidenced in the behaviour of naturally
dynamic systems and population distributions, such as radioactive decay and the ubiquituousity of normal or gaussian distributions
across all spectrums of observation. This series expansion relates to Fourier Series, Taylor-Laurent
Series and leads to Fourier Transforms and Laplacian transforms expressed in the superposition of sinusoidal trigonometric
series to exponential series. This derives from the complex extension of the linear formalisms via the
definition of the complex plane, say the Euler form sinX+icosX=cisX=exp(iX). In physics, this is then
modeled on the equations of Schroedinger, Dirac, Gordon-Klein in QFT, QED and QCD. The
precision of the electron-positron measurements are subject to the measurement technology and in no way 'bended'
in the somewhat misnamed 'uncertainty'. The measurement precision in QED in particular re,mains
unparalled by any other mensuration science. It is the complementarity between the electron's WAVEFUNCTION
(which is certain) and its PARTICLEFUNCTION, which has lead to the construction of the HUP.
>>3 ] If a electron hits a positron hard enough it will annihilate into a new particle of positronium plus gamma radiation
to represent lost energy . >No, when an electron annihilates with a positron, the energy inertial
selfstate TRANSFORMS via m=E/c2 <-> f=E/h. The applicable quantum geometry of this engages gauge blueprints,
which relate to the quark-gluon plasma of the standard models. For positronium to form, the leptons must 'capture'
each other in orbit. This orbit relates to the quarkian templates in the wavefunction of say a neutron decomposing in say
the commonly known beta decays of radioactivity.
m=E/c 2 <-> f=E/h addresses energy
of the gamma photons emitted only . A gluon acts like virtual positronium and sense 1 M volts produces one electron and one
positron from a vacuum then it would not be to far fetched to say the quark gluon is a ash left over from a electron / positron
annihilation . It requires a little imagination but if gluons , VEPS , could be responsible for setting the granularity of
space . If you are larger then the granularity of space then you are limited to the speed of light . If you are smaller then
there is no inertia . It is a nice way to have wave particle duality and chomodymamics by simply eliminating inertia below
the granularity of space . I say chromodynamics in the sense of a up / down quark flip for a neutron proton change or beta
decay . I really wish that one could be true as it would give a intuitive reason for quantum mechanics to be different . It
could be summarized in two words " no inertia " . Your general ideas are quite
feasible, but your approach lacks in detailed scrutiny. A gluon has practically nothing to do with a positronium. The gluon is one of the elementary gauge agents, transmitting the interacion strength (or force) between the four
elementary gauges (Gravitation/Graviton; Electromagnetism/Gauge Photon; Strong Nuclear/Gluon and Weak Nuclear/Weakon). So the only way a gluon can interact with anything is via other gauges, such as with a weakon in strongweak unification
or a photon in an electrostrong unification for example. But again, you have used your general
scientific intuition in a good manner, when you state: "If you are smaller then there is no inertia ." This is correct, as the MINIMUM Gluonic interaction quantum geometry precisely matches that of the gauge template
of the weakon (as the neutrino kernel) and as that of the other gauges. And this minimum
gauge configuration defines what you said. The INERTIA (E=mc^2), related to the c-invariance is transformed
into the (massless) GRAVITA (E=hf) by Einstein's Equivalence Principle. So your
basic idea is correct, but you did not follow it up in its consequences. You could have asked a pertinent
question then, which would allow you to enter into discussions about the 'dark energy' and the 'missing nonluminous
matter'. The question would be of the form: "If the granularity
of space is limited by the elementary gauge and if the inertial boundary for the lightspeed-boundary is found in this quantization
of spacetime itself; then how does the HUP define the displacement coordinates at that limit in the quantum formalisms?" Your 'wish' about the neutron beta decay is just about right, but lacks much detail and structure. The neutron has a dud quark configuration and transforms into a proton of quark content udu in interacting
through a gauge weakon in the shortrange weak interaction. Note here, that I have written the 'supersymmetric'
versions in a linear notation. In particular the neutron d(-1/2).u(+1/2).d(-1/2) must have
this basic (no internal gluon energy-momentum distribution) to have a resultant lefthanded (-1/2) quantum spin momentum. You might know, that ONLY lefthanded hyperons (including nucleons) engage the weak interaction in the
phenomenon of weak parity violation discovered officially in 1957. The linear alignment
is defined in a colour (or gluon) charged magnetoaxis which then can 'loop onto itself' as a quark-ring of the form
-d.u.d.- , say within a spherical template or envelope about the quarks, gluons and gauges (all defined in HUP wavefunctions
and not some mechanistic billard ball-spring model often found in popular literature (wikipedia, SciAm etc.)). The interacting weakon for matter is called Wminus and has a quantum-waveform of precisely the beforementioned
spheroidal envelope. It is a bosonic gauge of quantum spin (+1) and is 'made up' (and as known from its experimentally
observed decay-product) of an electron (+1/2) with its antineutrino (+1/2). The old neutron
is linearly (read magnetically) 'supersymmetric' because the d-quark in the linear arrangement is 'asymptotically
confined' by the size of the envelope, which happens to be the scale of the 'classical electron' in QFT, and the
range of the nuclear interactions itself at about 3 fermi. This is also the 'size' of the strange quark as a resonance
of the d-quark. The 'supersymmetry' so allows (one of the endpoint) d-quarks
to oscillate to its (higher) s-quark energy level and to INTERACT at that level with the weakon. Were
the linear quark content of the form udd (as WRONGLY depicted in the popular press); then this neutron would NOT be 'supersymmetric',
as the linear arrangement would have already 'broken' that symmetry. The quark content u.d.d
exists however and is base-defined as a neutral delta in the SU(3) baryon octet and where all the quarks are spinaligned for
a total spin angular momentum of 3/2. So one of the dud d-quarks oscillates to the energy
level of the W- and exchanges the 'leptonic ring boundary' AS the weakon's electron with the mesonic- or d-ring
level of the old nonoscillating neutron. The weakon (of the Feynman diagrams) so is 'destroyed'
with its righthanded electron ABSORBING the lefthanded spin of the d-quark and so neutralising the meson-lepton ring spinstate,
but EMERGING the observed righthanded (+1/2) electron antineutrino as product of beta minus decay of the neutron. There one observes however a LEFT POLARISATION of the MATERIALISING electron in conjunction with the
emission of the weakon defining righthanded electron antineutrino(+1/2). So the 0-spin bosonic lepton
ring (as electron precursor), becomes SPININDUCED by the gauge interaction at the kernel between the (already materialised)
antineutrino and a gluon coupled to the up-quark (which was part of the transforming down-quark in: d=KIR=Kernel(+2/3)+InnerRing(-1)=K+IR).
The weakon ring then is labeled OR=OuterRing. The +1 weakon spin so interacts 'weakly'
with the -1/2 spin of the interacting down-quark to MATERIALISE first the righthanded electronic antineutrino (+1/2) coupled
in strongweak unification to a 0-spin OR and then SPININDUCES the 'virtual' weakon AS a 'real' electron
in conjoin with the K=Kernel gauge unification. Then the 'virtual' weakon disappears
into the vacuum of the HUP and leaves behind the original 'virtual' antineutrino, seemingly MATERIALISING from the
neutron-proton transformation., as well as a real leftpolarised electron. The intermediate
transitional energy state so is a magnetically aligned d(-1/2).u(+1/2).[u(0)+antineutrino(+1/2)] plus the weakonic virtual
electron energystate electron(-1). This renders the SPIN EXCHANGE as REAL from the VIRTUAL
Inertia selfstate, as the virtuality of the energy in inertia has become finestructured in the energy of the quantum spin
distribution. Because the weakon is strongly kernel-coupled through its quantum geometric
template; the up-quark down-quark transformation via the electron-antineutrino decoupling of the weakon now allows the spin
neutralisation of the old endpoint d-quark to REVERSE the virtual decoupling in the SUPERSYMMETRIC SPINCONSERVATION of
the looped dud(-1/2)->-dud*(-1/2)-->-duu*(-1/2)-->-u*du(-1/2)-->-udu(-1/2)+electron(-1/2)+antineutrino(+1/2). The circularisation of the magnetoaxis 'destroys' the magnetic spinfixation and temporarily
allows a spin-realignment, which manifests in the FLIPPING of the weakon-gluon induced -1/2 spin into +1/2. This
of course renders the virtual weakon spin as REALISED in quantum spin supersymmetry (+1) manifests as the spincoupled up-quark
(+1/2) as remnnt of the old (-1/2) down-quark. d(-1/2).u(+1/2).u(0)+antineutrino(+1/2)+W-(-1)=u(-1/2+1).d(-1/2).u(+1/2)+antineutrino(+1/2)+electron(-1/2). The emergent proton so must also be rightpolarised in quarkcontent u(+1/2).d(-1/2).u(+1/2) and
so the proton CANNOT DECAY, as only leftpolarised hyperons engage in the weak interaction. The
search for a (supersymmetric SUSY) proton decay so will prove futile in the canons of the contemporary standard model for
particle physics.
>>4] once a electron / positron have formed positronium they
are in a confined state , stable state. >No, all positronium energy states are unstable and decay via
electromagnetic interaction. The positronium eigenstate is only the first (and of lowest energy) of many quark-lepton
eigenstates between matter and antimatter. The next one would be the J/PSI quark-antiquark (ccbar) coupling of the CHARMONIUM
energy eigenstate at about 3 GeV.
I can see I have lead you in the wrong direction by leaving out the
words annihilate of a electron / positron . That was my fault . I will guess you are addressing a quasi annihilation depicted
in a Feynman diagram as two Ys at either end with a electron / positron pair chasing each other in a tight circle . I believe
it quantifies into a few energy states before finally fizzling out . It is the fizzling out part that I refer to . I am proposing
that there is a ash left . I would like to say the ash is necessary for the conservation of information however I am not permitted
to do so has I do not believe the conservation of information is a imperative . There are times when scientific honesty really
gets in the way . Maybe someone else will say it and I will just keep my mouth shut :-). J/PSI quark-anti-quark
, Mr 2000 pound charming gorilla quark . There is not enough energy in the electron / positron for the charm quarks to merge
. Why would they be there ? There is no positronium-ash, but you are right; Information
is conserved under all circumstances. Hawking himself admitted of having his lost his bet with Kip Thorne
in regards to the 'Information Paradox' (the information absorbed in a Black Hole being lost except in the emission
of Hawking Radiation - but this is another topic, requiring elementary reanalysis). The Information
within a Black Hole is superconnected via the nature of the 4D-'flat' Minkowski spacetime being dimensionally coupled
to the 5th Kaluza-Klein dimension via a Einstein-Rosen-Bridge (ERB) aka a wormhole. A Black
Hole SinkSource so becomes modular dual to a White Hole SourceSink. Practically this implies, that all of the information
in the defined 5-dimensional universe (and as a 11-dimensional surface topolgy) can be accessed anywhere in nonlocal stringcoordinates. Then a Black Hole Sink can emit its data as a White Hole Source anyplace the higher dimensional universe under
the auspices of the defining boundary parameters. >>5 ] a particle of positronium
may be separated into the original electron / positron with 1 M volt . This fits the standard model rather well and does not
violate the conservation of energy . >The decay of positronium, as indicated above, is electromagnetic
and occurs spontaneously at the 1 MeV level as each lepton must conserve momentum and energy as their restenergies of so 0.51
MeV. But IF the positronium constituent would have significatly higher energy (like the J/PSI for example); THEN the
decay products would include quark-antiquark couplings (mesons) as well as photons (gamma rays), because of the electroweak
coupling between mass-inertia and photon energy.
This is the second time you have brought up the
2000 pound gorilla . I will have to do some homework on J/PSI to see why it would be relevant . Indeed,
the Charmonium energystates are very important; as they represent the first energy resonance of the matter-antimatter coupling
beyond the basic neutron-antineutron level.This is because the so called charm-anticharm quark content
is actually finestructured in DIQUARKS.This is not as yet understood by the standard modellers, but
they have stumbled upon it in the discovery of quark molecules and the pentaquarks (wiki it) in the particle accelerators. The charm-anticharm becomes a DoubleUp-antiup.antiDoubleUp-up quarkian complex as a up-charm strange-down
energy boundary for the 3 GeV energy eigenstate. I have only touched on a fraction of the
points you have brought up . Lots of thinking and googling to get through it . I will try to addess them tomorrow . Thanks
again for taking the time . You are welcome and despite the enemies; your questions and critiques
might serve others to become familiar with the 'real' future physics of the omni-science (which I myself only understand
peripherally or skeletally - but I am learning more about it from my familiars from the extraterrestrial realms).
Hi Tony
>No, the electron and positrons are NOT particles, which you can geometrically distribute with
fixed positions (Pauli Exclusion and Heisenberg Uncertainty) .
Yes and no . How is that for sitting on the fence
. The resolution that can be achieved with a electron microscope indicates that the area in influence of electron in limited
to a small size pointing to it's particle nature . However to give this balance the notion that it a electron is a particle
introduces a paradox for the conservation of energy that has to do with acceleration electrodes . If one were to carefully
focus electron plates then a acceleration of the electrons could be achieved without paying the price of energy . I say this
as if the electron never hits the accelerating electrode then no energy has been taken from the electrodes . You could accelerate
electrons all day without having to recharge the accelerators . This is a violation of the conservation of energy . Therefore
the electron must have a influence of some kind that is greater than it's apparent single point to discharge the accelerator's
. QM has a nice solution to this as the electron will always have a probability of being outside it;s predicted position .
That would satisfy the conservation of energy as it should discharge the accelerators . I have a model for a electron that
does the same without QM but that is another story . I will improve on the yes / no answer by saying the electron has a central
position that attenuates at the square of the distance just like the energy of the sun diminishes with distance . This leaves
the door open for electrons and positrons to sort of be particles . Always leave past doors open a crack . If not you could
get into hot water explaining how a electron microscope can resolve information down to single atoms . >>Hi John! It appears you did not understand much of my last post; where the point-particle nature of the electron (and
all socalled elementary particles) is addressed in the context of the quark geometry. It is well understood by the standard model physicists; that the renormalisation of the electron energy shows
mathematical 'inconsistencies' in terms of the QED electron and the QFT electron. This 'quasi-inconsistency' was addrressed in the 1920's following by Pauli, Heisenberg, Tomanaga,
Born and Schwinger in many many detailed papers addressing the 'infinite energy' of the electron, if considered
as a point-source. It is also the basis for the debates of the 'electromagnetic electronmass'. I would advise you to familiarise yourself
with some of this work, before you attempt to 'overthrow' the work done in the last century by the theoreticians and
the experimenters. There are 'missing elements' in the standard
models, and as I have said; SOME of your ideas are valuable in the search for the extensions of those models. But to be clear to you; your (valid) ideas are in no way clear and significant enough to 'challenge'
the foundations of those paradigms; though (and I have pointed those parts out to you). The same later on in your address, where you 'challenge'
the existence of Black Holes. To do so; you require a selfconsistent model, which 'explains' both formally and informally in
a qualitative-quantitative synthesis what thousands of trained physicists observe, measure and model every day around the
globe. I have no
intent, time and desire to discuss the 'overthrow' of the standard models foundations with anyone, anyplace or anytime. Einstein did not 'overthrow' Newton; he built and EXTENDED Newton. Whatever Newtonian
Classical Physics modeled; Einstein USED as say a 'lower energy or parameter' approximation. Not many forum contributers take the time
to SERIOUSLY look at others proposals. I have done so for many people
on this forum and I have done so for you. I have indicated to you, where
your ideas have merit and where they have not. You continue to question
well established models, WITHOUT presenting a viable alternative model. You are of course free to do so; but you can
then expect little feedback from people about your own ideas; without even attempting to INCORPORATE your ideas into what
has been modeled before. >The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle (HUP) describes a number of proportionalities,
such as between Energy and Time or between displacement and momentum. This then relates Energy to Frequency in a 'wave
nature' and Energy to Position in a 'particle nature' respectively.
I see your point and would add
well stated . Uncertainty has empirical evidence on it's side and therefore can not be denied however at the end of the
day it is a blunt statement without a intuitive explanation appended to it . There is a price to be payed for this . Pacing
the floor at night to think of physics without the need of a calculator is a advantage . Excepting principles without a intuitive
understanding means pacing the floor is unlikely to be fruitful . >>It
seems you somewhat eschew calculations and formalism. These are the 'bread and butter' following some intuitive insights,
which you indicate as of having attained.
>Your general ideas
are quite feasible, but your approach lacks in detailed scrutiny. A gluon has practically nothing to do with a positronium.
In the interest of communicating in physics I translate my physics into conventional physics so that there is common
ground . I can see in my enthusiasm that have failed to do this . I have space , positron , electron , gluon and a few
others as the same particle with a dynamic outside presents driven by it's environment . It does not work at this point
but I tend to think of it that way . I can see how it would not be comprehensible . You are right , a gluon is a gluon . In
the case of the standard model My justification for a unification in this way stems from weak and strong forces being caused
by distance of different charges . A + and - charge close together in a neutron is not the same as a + and - charge that is
1 inch apart . In the case of a neutron the + and - charge starts off strong but cancels itself quickly due to the different
charges overlapping in a interference pattern which leads to a more intuitive reason for the essence of a neutron having a
probability of being away from it's central position but to a lesser degree . It does a nice job of tunnelling as well
. If this is true then the electron must also be the positron in order for it to interfere with itself . In other words the
only thing negative about a electron is the positive charges that are around it which most of mass in general is ,, positively
charged . We will always measure a electron to have a charge of - one as we are using mass as a reference . If equal amounts
of mass / anti mass could be used as a ground reference then the electron should measure a charge of zero . It has a wonderful
symmetry to it as anti mass ans mass may now share the same fabric of space and space itself becomes the electron for hydrogen
and the positron for anti hydrogen . I can see I am rambling again with my ideas . In summery I have the gluon as a general
purpose particle who properties are position dependent . Where it is is what it is . Radioactive decay is a good example of
what something is is what it is around it or stuck to it in this case .
>>I
have presented a DETAILED quantum geometric model in the semantics for the basis of radioactive decay. You have not done so
in the above and you have not found it necessary to COMPARE and/or INCORPORATE your say gluon-ideas into that model in a synthesis.
How do you propose to 'revolutionise' the standard model in particle physics - without equations; without standard
nomenclature and without reference what stands for the conventionally accepted parameters of the model?
>There is no positronium- ash, but you are right; Information is conserved under all circumstances. Hawking himself
admitted of having his lost his bet with Kip Thorne in regards to the 'Information Paradox' (the information absorbed
in a Black Hole being lost except in the emission of Hawking Radiation - but this is another topic, requiring elementary reanalysis). The Information within a Black Hole is superconnected via the nature of the 4D-'flat' Minkowski spacetime being
dimensionally coupled to the 5th Kaluza-Klein dimension via a Einstein-Rosen- Bridge (ERB) aka a wormhole.
There
is substance and there is mass . Mass is not a good word . It has two meanings , inertia and energy . Inertia and energy are
better words as their meaning is pure , not mixed . If there is anything that screws up physics it is a word that has two
meanings . The inertia [ + and - charge ] of a electron / positron pair has gone and therefore there is no inertia . That
is where the energy is . Why would the substance of the electron also disappear ? That would be magic . The ash is still there
and if the energy is put back in the electron / positron will reemerge . I can not drag you over the fence on this one as
it really comes down to what one wishes to believe without the proof . I can say that 1 M volt produces a electron / positron
but I may not say that it is resurrecting a ash of a preexisting electron / positron or it is translating energy into a electron
/ positron . However if given a choice which one has less magic ?
>>This
is just wordplay. The phenomena of pair-production and of pair-annihilation are all modeled in extensive formalisms and are
validated by experiment. A first start for your model would be to CLEARLY
DEFINE AND MODEL what your 'positronium ash' represents IN THE LANGUAGE OF THE STANDARD MODEL. Hawking's information paradox . In my mind the paradox is the black hole itself not the loss of information . There
is no proof of a black hole other than some tight orbits in the centre of our galaxy . Sense we are all still here then the
notion of a black hole is questionable unless some way is found to prevent it's growth . I will admit that good science
comes from thinking of a black hole as well as the notions of a big bang but until one is confirmed I would not be entertaining
ideas of wrapping strings around the outside of a black hole to prevent the loss of information . Hawking did not say this
but his colleagues did . A string that must have mass in order to resonate that can not fall into a black hole to conserve
information sounds like pure science removed from the fundamentals of Newtonian physics . The two should go together to make
sure we are still standing on sound bricks .
>>This is simply nonsense
in my (and the majority of physicists worldwide) view. Physicists do
not 'think' of notions of Black Holes and Big Bangs; they have NAMED certain conclusions and phenomena-based observations
as 'Black Hole' and 'Big Bang'. And both phenomena ARE CONFIRMED (to certain observational limits and similar
criteria of 'proof'). If you question this, then you are
classified (by the majority of researchers and analysts studying those phenomena) as a 'Standard Model Dissident'.
Unfortunately, there are more of those on this forum (where they expect to perhaps find a sympathetic hearing about their
'paradigm overthrowing models'), than genuine PIONEERS, who seek to EXTEND those paradigms (not undermining them). Your other comment about strings shows, that you have no clear idea what those strings are classified
as. If interested in string theory; I can recommend a book: 'The
Elegant Universe', by Brian Greene to you. I often use that book
(his first one) as a reference to show, where string theory can be extended and simplified for the general scientifically
literate community. I am a Newtonian too, John. My attempts to
EXTEND the various standard models use no more compliocated mathematical formalism than basic classical Newtonianism (with
minor excursions into the Riemannian multidimensional curvature space).
I am enjoying these debates
as there is something about expressing ideas in words that forces one to organize thoughts in ways that would other wise not
be done . There are still many points in your last post that have not been addressed . I agree!
John
John
Shadow
John John Shadow The
Mystery of Gravitation and the Elementary Graviton Loop
This message shall address the mystery of gravitation
and will prove to be a pertinent cornerstone for your terrestrial scientists, which are searching for the unification physics
in regards to their cosmologies. This message so requires familiarity with technical nomenclature, but I shall
attemt to simplify sufficiently for all interested parties to follow the outlines. 1. Classically metric Newtonian-Einsteinian
Gravitation and the Barycentre! 2. Quantum Gravitation and the Alpha-Force - Why two mass-charges attract each other! 3. Gauge-Vortex Gravitons in Modular String-Duality! 4. The Positronium Exemplar! 1. Classically metric Newtonian-Einsteinian Gravitation and the Barycentre!
Most of you are know of gravity as the long-range force {FG}, given by Isaac Newton as the interaction
between two masses {m1,2}, separated by a distance R and in the formula: {FG
=G.m1.m2/R2 } and where G is Newton's Gravitational Constant, presently measured
as about 6.674x10-11 G-units and maximised in Planck- or string units as Go=1.111..x10-10 G-units.
The masses m1,2 are then used as 'point-masses', meaning that the mass of an object can be thought
of as being centrally 'concentrated' as a 'centre of mass' and/or as a 'centre of gravity'.
For example, the mass of the earth is about m1=6x1024 kg and the mass of the sun is about m2=2x1030
kg and so as 'point-masses' the earth and the sun orbit or revolve about each other with a centre of mass or
BARYCENTRE within the sun, but displaced towards the line connecting the two bodies. The sun and the earth are about
1 AU=Astronomical Unit or R=150 Million km apart and the formula for the Barycentre relative to earth is: {RB1=R/[1+m1/m2]}~0.999997
R~149.999550 Million km and RB2=R-RB1 =450 km as the Barycentre within the sun's radius of nearly 700,000 km. So the sun 'wobbles' about the barycentre, with
the earth orbiting around the same and the sun.
The 'Force of Gravity' acting between the Sun and the Earth
then calculates as so 3.56x1022 Newton (N), but a force which is neutralised in balance at the Barycentre 450 km
from the solar centre.
More generally, the (vector) sum of the 'moments' of the pointmasses divided by
the total mass: {R=Σmi.ri/Σmi } gives the centre of mass (vector) {R} as
an average for the displacements between the pointmasses relative to the total mass content of the system analysed.
Gaian physicists then attempt to unify the elementary interactions in applying gauge theories to the long-range interactions
of electromagnetism and gravity with the short-range interactions, which are nuclear and associated with a weak leptonic force
of radioactivity and a strong quarkian gluon-force of colour-charges.
But the Newtonian modeling for gravitation
proves insufficient for such unification attempts and the reason for this is the concept of distance and the idea of 'point-masses'.
In particular, the 'Standard Model' of particle physics requires 'Mediator-particles' for all of the
above interactions and the 'mediator for gravity', called the Graviton, has proven to be a mysterious 'beast'
in the 'particle zoo' of that model (SM). This Graviton so must act as a long-range agent between 'point-masses'
and is also necessitated to unify with the other agents for electromagnetic interaction and the nuclear forces.
Albert
Einstein greatly improved the Newtonian model by allowing the 'space' between masses to become a property of the energy
contained within that 'space of interaction'.
Space itself becomes the medium in geometric terms to allow
the mass-energy or inertia to manifest in the interaction of gravitation in the Theory of General Relativity.
General
Relativity then derives the mathematical formalisms to describe the 'Curvature of Space' as being a direct consequence
of the Inertia present within that space. The presence of mass in space so curves this space around the mass as the
Inertia of Newton {via the Newtonian Force-Momentum Laws based on: {FI =ma=d(mv)/dt for acceleration a, velocity
v, time t and momentum p=mv}.
Newton's inertial mass {mi} is then rendered equivalent to Einstein's
gravitational mass {mg} in the form of the concept of a 'Geometrical Gravitational Field' becoming
identical in terms of its acceleration potential to the accelaration a as given in the Inertial frames defined in the
Laws of Isaac Newton and as mg=mi=m.
The significance of Einstein's Gravitation as a
classical geometric model is its generalisation of spacetime coordinates, known as metrics. For example, applying the
'curved lines' of the orbit of Mercury about the sun due to their gravitational interaction; 'corrects' the
'perihelion of Mercury' as calculated by the Newtonian Law, using 'straight lines'. Using
Kepler's Laws of orbits in conjunction with Newton's law of gravity does not 'close' Mercury's orbit,
so resulting in an 'advance' of the perihelion. Einstein's geometric adjustment then finetunes the Kepler-Newton
formalism to undo this advance.
So it can be said, that Einstein's General Relativity has adjusted
Newtonian Gravitation in rendering the latter more precise.
But all attempts to extend Einsteinian Gravitation
to encompass the quantum world of the 'point-masses' have failed and the reason for this failure are the metrics themselves.
The 'point-masses' engage what is called the world of the very small or micro-quantum and so the idea
of using classical geometry in the Newtonian sense will falter at the definition of what those 'point-masses' are
in geometrical terms.
A 'point-mass' relates to a 'mathematical idealisation' called a 'point'. This point is well defined mathematically as an abstraction called NUMBER. But this Number cannot exist in
a physical sense in the 'space of 3 dimensions', as any such 3-dimensional space is itself a mathematical construction
of its lower dimensional precursors, namely the dimensionalities of a Null-Space, a 1D-Space known as a metric 'line'
(relatively either straight or curved) and a 2D-Space known as area, surfaces or manifolds or planes.
The application of Newtonian- or Einsteinian Gravitation so presupposes the existence of a 3D-Space as a volume of cross-sectional
areas, the latter being constructed of say a summation of lines or metrics. Those metrics are however mathematically
defined in the Summation of the 'Points' of the Null-Space and so reduce to the abstraction of the NUMBERS.
The secret of gravitation then becomes the secret of the precursor metrics, the 'stuff' or 'essence' which
allowed the metrics as the line-segments of the first dimension to emerge.
This essence is the mathematical process,
which rendered the Null-Space of the 'Point' as a NON-METRIC or a demetricated 'prespace'. This 'prespace'
is NOT physical, but is mathematical and abstract and is able to MANIFEST a physical 'point-mass' AS A PHYSICALLY
ASSOCIATED 'point-charge'.
The 'point-charge' so is precursive to a 'point-mass' in terms
of any metric parameter using 3D-Space and any potential inertia contained therein.
The 'point-charge'
existing as a NUMBER in Null-Space then allows 'point-masses' to emerge in the first dimension as 'associated
numbers', which subsequently integrate or sum as 'point-spaces' to create the background coordinate metrics for
Einsteinian Relativity and Minkowskian Spacetime.
The mystery of the Unification Physics so changes from the fourfolded
synthesis of the gauge interactions in terms of the mediator particles {Graviton, Gauge Photon, Higgs-Weakon and Gluon} to
the mystery of the 'point-spaces', defined in something called 'point-charges'.
In terms of the
existence of a universe comprised of 'point-spaces'; it becomes necessary to associate each and every 'spacetime
quantum' with a 'point-charge'.
This is known by Gaian physicists as a Zero-Point-Energy, a Minimum
Planck-Oscillator or as a Heisenberg-Vacuum. We may also term the ZPE the VPE and as the Vacuum-Potential-Energy or the Vortex-Potential-Energy.
In other words, the physical universe becomes METRIC in summing 'point-spaces' or spacetime quanta, defined
in an 'essence' of 'point-charges'; and where those 'point-charges' are rather more elementary than
anything manifesting within the metricated coordinate systems used in mathematical models to describe physical reality.
The mensuration physics of terrestrial scientists is based on seven fundamental parameters: Displacement; Time; Mass;
Temperature; Current; Luminosity; Molarity or in order the (SI)-units of: meter; second; kilogram; kelvin; ampere; candela
and mole. These units are supplemented by a geometrical pi-unifier in the radian and the sterradian connecting the dimensional
concepts of the 3 dimensions in lines, areas and volumes and by differential boundary conditions.
But it is the
concept of electric current, measured in the Ampere as the ratio of charge over time or as the product of charge and frequency;
which is the most elementary measurement unit as a superposition of the charge parameter (measured in Coulombs).
For the concept of Frequency as inverse time allows the mathematical concept of the Null-Space to become physicalised in
the 'Flow of Charge'.
This 'Charge-Flow' is the basis for the 'point-charges'; as the charges
measured in the Ampere are not necessarily the same as these 'point-charges'.
In particular the idea of
'Electric Charge' as understood by Gaian physicists is ALWAYS associated with -point-masses' and is therefore
not truly elementary because the 'point-masses' are themselves derivatives from the 'point-spaces'.
The NATURE of an electric charge is a mystery to the Gaian scientists, though the behaviour of those electric charges is
well understood and analysed in the association of those electric charges with inertial energy carriers.
Anything
inertial, any mass whatsover carries electric charge; although this charge can be neutralised in an overall zero-charge consisting
of opposite summations, say as a neutron carrying a positive proton charge (+1) and a negative electron charge (-1) in its
triquark partition dud=(-1+2-1)/3=(+2+2+2)/3-2=0. Similarly, a quark-antiquark matter-antimatter coupling like a base-pion
u.ubar carries an internal electrocharge distribution (+2-2)/3=0.
The NATURE of an ELECTROCHARGE or a Coulombic
Charge is the NATURE of the 'POINT-SPACE'!
The ElectroCharge associated with electrons and protons
and neutrons is also a property of the Point-Space aka the VPE.
The mystery of mass and inertia and the secret
of gravitation so has reduced to the mystery of what the VPE represents in terms of the ElectroCharges.
A long standing cosmological conundrum encountered by the Gaian scientists has for long been the immense discrepancy
between the calculated ZPE=VPE and the measured energy density in the observable universe. The mass-energy density in
the universe is calculated in General Relativity to be 'critical' for a geometrically closed universe in the
formulation: {ρc=Mc/Vc=3Ho2 /8πG~4x10-27 kg/m3
s}. The Heisenberg ZPE for the vacuum calculates however in Planck-Oscillator terms as: {ρP=MP/VP
~2π.c5/hG2~2x1096 kg/m3 s}, so giving an 'error' of magnitude:
ρc/ρP=2x10123.
General Relativity and Classical Physics so predicts
a density mass-distribution smaller by 123 magnitudes, than the mass-distribution of Quantum Mechanics.
What is
the reason for this discrepancy - what is the true NATURE of the ZPE to account for this error?
The True Nature
of the ZPE is that of the NON-Mass-Associated 'Point-Charge' called MagnetoCharge!
The MagnetoCharge is
defined NOT in terms of the flow of electrocharges, but is given in the precursor for those electrocharges from Null-Space
itself and so is INDEPENDENT on the seven mensuration units of measurement physics. Subsequently, the NATURE of MagnetoCharges
does not require metric coordinate systems and so by necessity is a precursive form of General Relativity labeled as
Quantum Relativity.
This independence on ANY coordinate system so greatly simplifies the mathematical
formalism required to solve the secret of Quantum Gravitation and the mystery of inertia.
What occurs, is that
the Null-Space is described as a 'Mathematical Singularity', which is rendered a 'Physical Singularity'
in a 'Minimum Space-Point Configuration'.
Space and time and mass are not required to define this
'singularity' but the MagnetoCharge is necessitated to provide a formal link to bridge the mathematical Null-Space
to the 3-dimensional Minimum-Energy-Configuration.
The MagnetoCharge so becomes a form of ENERGY independent from
the physical parameters of the classical energy-momentum expressions based on Einstein's E=mc2 and the quantum
energy-momentum expressions based on the Action Law of Planck's E=hf.
Definition of the MagnetoCharge so must
become an elementary energy definition from which the classical formalisms in General Relativity and the equations of
quantum mechanics emerge as derivatives.
Knowing the definition for the MagnetoCharge as a form of noninertial
energy then allows a unification of the gauge mediators, which are all massless in principle and as understood by the terran
physicists. All gauge mediators must become products or permutations of the magnetocharged precursive template and
the concept of mass-induction from this selfsame mass-less gauge eigenstate will derive as a gauge interaction in
a coupling to the magnetocharges.
It will then be seen, that the Graviton as the gauge for long-range gravitational
interaction is ALWAYS coupled or unified with the other long-range gauge of the 'virtual' photon of the electromagnetic
interaction.
2. Quantum Gravitation and the Alpha-Force - Why two mass-charges attract
each other!
So the mystery of the Graviton as the 'quantum of gravity' elucidates itself in
its omnipresent unified eigenstate with the so called 'Virtual Photon' of the Heisenberg background matrix. The
Graviton and the Gauge Photon interact long-range in the 'Mapping' of the mass-couplings of ElectroCharges to the
MagnetoCharges in the 'point-masses' coupling to the 'point-charges'.
We shall soon discover,
that the 'graviton' exchange between 'point-masses' is always UNIFIED with a 'gauge - or virtual photon'
exchange said to transmit the 'force' or interaction between 'point-charge' associated inertia carriers.
The nuclear short-range gauge interactions are similarly unified in the MagnetoCharges linking the weak 'outer
ring' charges to the strong 'inner ring' ElectroCharges coupled to the inertia of the Higgs-Mass-Induction mechanisms. The decisive parameter differentiating the long-rangers from the short-rangers then becomes the definition of the MagnetoCharges
as a short-range 'Displacement', known as a 'Gluonic Magneto-Asymptotic Confinement Zone' by the Gaian analysts.
In Quantum Mechanics, the classical properties of energy {E} and momentum {p=mv=h/λdeBroglie} are
substituted for by 'quantum operators', which describe statistical distributions of classical properties like position
and momentum in terms of the wave-particle duality.
The the ubiquituous 'wavefunction' operator |ψ2|
, is said to describe the probability to locate a classical property like position <x> for a system under consideration. We shall find, that this 'probability' distribution applies to METRIC systems and that there exists a 'Hamiltonian'
precursor for the wavefunction in the productation of ElectroChargexMagnetoCharge in {ee*}.
But here are is a simple
introduction to the quantum formalism in the form of the Schrödinger Equation and the particular emphasis to describe
the Newtonian Momentum <p> as the 'operator' <h∂/i∂x> and the Energy becoming a 'Hamiltonian
Operator' <E>→<H>.
The Link is from Georgia State University and in """": http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/HFrame.html
""Schrödinger Equation
The Schrödinger equation plays the role of Newton's laws and conservation of energy in classical mechanics - i.e., it predicts the future behavior of a dynamic system.
It is a wave equation in terms of the wavefunction which predicts analytically and precisely the probability of events or outcome. The
detailed outcome is not strictly determined, but given a large number of events, the Schrödinger equation will predict
the distribution of results.

The kinetic and potential energies are transformed into the Hamiltonian
which acts upon the wavefunction to generate the evolution of the wavefunction in time and space. The Schrödinger equation
gives the quantized energies of the system and gives the form of the wavefunction so that other properties may be calculated.
""
The key to 'unify' classical mechanics a la' Newton and Einstein with quantum mechanics
a la' Bohr, Heisenberg, Schrödinger and Dirac; is NOT to seek for an extended metric formalism, BUT to DEMETRIFY
BOTH in an application of the 'Holographic Principle'.
Superstring theory a la' Witten is still METRIC
and from this derive the mathematical complexities and practical hindrances to predict experimental outcomes.
Quantum Mechanics is rather successful in predicting particular outcomes of say hydrogen-like systems, where a single electron
interacts with its environment. But Quantum Mechanics is METRIC and statistically uses density distributions of classical
macrosystems to quantify the particle properties from the wave properties.
Quantum Relativity considers all macrosystems
as metric-independent holograms of the fundamental dimensional generators in the <E*=1/e*> Energy-Eigenstate of
the birth of the metric itself.
So here is the fundamental Hamiltonian operator, responsible fore the 'Generation
of the Universe' in: {E*.e*=1}.
This Hamiltonian MAPS the MagnetoCharge {e*} AS a spacetime independent
operator onto the ElectroCharge {e} within the generated spacetime.
A further definition engages the 'Oscillating
Planck-Length' { OLP=√alpha.LP=e/c2}~1.785x10-36 meters.
This
shows, that a decrease of the Planck-Length in a factor of about 11.7, will render the displacement parameter of [Length]
equal to the unitisation [ElectroCharge]/[Velocity2]=[ElectroChargexMass/Energy]. One can so say that the
'Coulomb' as the unit for the quantum of charge in a metric universe is represented as a Lengthxc2 or
a Volume/Time2=V.df/dt 'element' in a 'shadow' nonmetric universe.
This also shows,
that the 'Stoney-Units' 'unify' the 'Planck-Units' in multiplying the Planck-Units by the Squareroot
of the Electromagnetic finestructure constant Alpha=2πke2/hc=e2/2εohc=60πe2/h
and coupled to the Eigenenergy of the electron as: mec2=hfe=ke2/Re and
where Re is the 'classical electron radius'.
In a metricated universe, the 'Coulomb'
of 'C' represents a 'StarCoulomb' in a demetricated universe.
The StarCoulomb is defined in
the (F-Space)-Hamiltonian Operator of:
{e*=1/E*=2Re.c2 =V*.|df/dt|max} and
defines the StarCoulomb C* to be a frequency-differential operator {df/dt} acting like an angular acceleration upon a spacetime
volumar V*.
This operator extends the basic classical Newtonian ForceLaw in the chainrule and the special relativistic
application of the increase of inertia with velocity.
FNewton=ma=m.dv/dt=dp/dt=d(mv)/dt=d(hf.v/c2)/dt=(h/c2){f.dv/dt+v.df/dt}=m.dv/dt
+ (hv/c2).df/dt =malinear
+ maangular = Fa + Fα = Forcemetric + Forcealpha.
The Alpha-Force of the Newtonian extension is 'hidden' in the macroscopic classical agglomerations of quantumised
microsystems because of the smallness of the coefficient (h/c2=7.4074..x10-51) acting on a de Broglien
wave matter velocity vdB=h/mλdB, maximised in the Compton wavelength λc=h/mc. So only 'group-velocities' vg<c are observed in macrosystems, comprised by 'phase velocities'
vph >c.
The formal definition for a generalised wavespeed v=λf=λE/h=λmc2/h is:
{vph =λf=(h/mvg)(mc2/h)=c2/vg >c for all vg<c.}
We may also define the differential operator of a changing frequency over linear time as: |df/dt|=alphaomega=αω=aw=awareness and
so couple the 'awareness' to a 3D-volume in the form of a definition for the Consciousness inherent in spacetime itself.
The StarCoulomb C* so gives a unit of measurement fore spacetime consciousness in the unifying holographic sense of
the fractalisation realising its encompassing unity.
'Spacial' Consciousness, measured in C* so becomes
maximised in the 'entropy constant' f*2 and where the modular string-duality defines the maximum frequency
fmax=f*=1/fmin=1/tNOW that is the time instanton ending the inflationary string epoch and
birthing the metric minimum configuration in the Big Bang of the Standard Models.
Using this definition, the so
called 'missing mass' in the universe can be defined as a 'Dark Energy' of 'Spacial Consciousness'
inherent in the structure of spacetime itself.
In particular the RMP as the 'dark matter' particle assumes
a precise Volume V* under the maximisation condition for the entropy, as by definition of the MagnetoCharge; e*=1/hf*=V*f*2
or V*=e*/f*2=1/hf*3.
The units for the StarCoulomb are also the units of Inverse Energy
under string duality and so the Volumar occupied by a maximised MagnetoCharge carrier becomes 5.555x10-59 m3
for a (toroidal) radius of Rα=1.412x10-20 meters at a particle eigenenergy of Eα=hc/2πRα=2.2545..x10-6
Joules or 14.034.. TeV.
Your Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at Geneva, Switzerland, so if operating at maximum
capacity at precisely that energy regime, will provide experimental evidence about the 'dark matter' particle of the
RestmassPhoton in due course.
More information about the RMP and related topics can be found elsewhere on the linked
sites.
To illuminate the underpinning mathematics and formalisms for the gauge interactions of long- and short-range
interactions; it suffices to briefly describe the nuclear processes of pair-production and pair-annihilation
in their most basic form of the eigenstates of positronium. I shall also give exact energy values for the gauge
particles as source agents of the VPE and so clarify the NATURE of GRAVITY as the multidimensional partnership between Coulombic
ElectroCharges and Gluonic MagnetoCharges aka Gluonic ColourCharges underpinning all of creation.
And we shall
find that the true VPE is given in the expression: {ZPE*=4π.E*/λ*3=2.513..x1064 Joules/m3};
and where ZPE* represents the Vacuum-Energy E* per unit spacetime quantum. The actual mass density in the universe
so becomes a constant in ρ*=m*/V*=2.792..x1047 kg/m3. This value also represents a 'reduced'
Planck-Energy in a factor of about 7.2x1011 , so allowing experimental physics to probe the 'transformed
Planckian String Scale' at an energy region of about 1,240 TeV or 1.24x107 GigaElectronVolt (GeV) and larger
in a factor of about 88 than the present experimental limit of the LHC at Geneva, Switzerland.
So why and
how do two 'point-masses' attract each other?
Two 'point-masses' are also two magnetocharged 'point-charges'
and this colour-charging maps the electro-charging of the internal 'inertia-charging' with mass unto the long-range
manifesto of the inverse-square central 'force'-interaction of linearised displacement.
In other words,
the 'Vortex' or Newtonian 'Centre of Mass' acting like a 'point-mass' appears to be separated
from another such 'Vortex' by a distance R; say as the 150 Million kilometers between the centre of the sun and the
centre of the planet earth.
Two mass-charges attract each other across a particular distance, known as the 'asymptotic
quark-confinement limit', which coincides with the scale of activity for the nuclear interactions. This scale is
of the order of 3 Fermi or a femtometer (10-15 meters) and is a fundamental string parameter in the form of the
Classical Electron Radius Re and also an intrinsic parameter for the definition of the magneto-charge as indicated
in the above.
At this scale, the Higgs-Induction particles are defined in the nuclear weak interaction; labelled
as Weakons (W-, W+, Zo ) and describing the couplings between leptonic (anti)neutrino kernels and leptonic 'outer'
rings in electron-positron generations (electron, muon, tauon).
Within the nuclear interaction zone of a 'Hyperelectron'
radius Re, the VPE of the 'point-mass-charges' interacts in a Quantum Geometry, which attracts radius-differentiated
configurations but repels like configurations on the same scale.
Then a kernelled GLUON at a VPE-scale of ~10-22
meters becomes STRONGLY coupled to an 'inner- sonic-ring' scale at ~10-18 meters and WEAKLY coupled
to an 'outer-leptonic-ring' scale at Re ~3x10-15 meters. This then describes a (Anti)Neutrino-Gluon
coupling, which allows the strong nuclear interaction to decay into a weak nuclear interaction.
This scenario then
shows from first principles, that the quark content of elementary particles is a function of permutational geometries and
not describable as a mechanistic billard ball model, connected by gluonic 'springs'.
Rather the quantum
geometry describes the Particles as WAVICLES; the wavefunctions intermixing and superimposing as quantum eigenstates
defined by magnetocharge distributions.
This colour-charge distribution then describes the finestructure of quarks
and leptons in some non-particularised foem based on the intermixing and blending of the 'colour-charges' of
the gluons.
But there are NOT 8 different gluons, but only the one gluon of 8 permutations between the energy eigenstates
Radiative (White additive via E=hf) and Inertial (Black subtractive via E=mc2). For the hyperons and nucleons
of a SU(3) Unitary Symmetry (details are elsewhere to be found on this site); the 8 permutations are: BBB-BWB-BBW-WBB-BWW-WWB-WBW-WWW
for the transformation of energy from the purely massless to the purely inertial. For the matter-antimatter or quark-antiquark
mesons, the permutations are in SU(2) as BB-BW-WB-WW.
The characteristic lambda-hyperon eigenstate of quark content
uds so produces three different wavicles in the stable Lambda (d.u.s=Λo) decaying wekly in about 10-10
seconds; the less stable Sigmao (u.s.d=Σo) decaying electromagnetically in about 10-18
seconds and the least stable Sigmao*-resonance (u.d.s=Σo*), decaying strongly in about 10-23
seconds.
The d.u.s configuration is most stable in an alignment of three spin-alternating quarkian wavelets
along a magnetoaxis, which is encompassed by the asymptotic weakon zone of Re. As the d-quark and the s-quark
spin in parallel around an antialigned spinning u-quark, the attraction between the colourcharges across the up-quark renders
the repulsion between the ring-quarks as minimised and the lambda eigenstate is relatively stable. The lambda decays characteristically
into a neutron d.u.d and a mesonic pion uubar, with the right s-quark oscillating in W- interaction {W-(+1)+GraviPhoton(-1)={e-
+(+½)+ ν¯e(+½)}+GP(-1)→lefthanded electron {e- (-½)+ν¯e(+½)}
in the NONPARITY of the weak interaction, meaning only lefthanded particles undergo weak radioactive decay. The original lambda
particle so is left-polarised in the outer quarks spinning in a combined quantum spin momentum of -1 so cancelling the 'Spinconserving'
GraviPhoton=GP for the Weakon Interaction.
The u.s.d configuration manifests in a left-isolated kaonic attraction
between the up-quark and the strange quark, which becomes supplemented by the d-s interaction, which is of lesser gradient
towards the right. The quantum geometry of the u.s.d so is left-skewed and results in relatively quick electromagnetic decay
as the s-quark circularises a quarkian loop in colour-charge coupling with the up-quark, so exchanging permutational position
along the magnetoaxis and attaining the relative stability of the lamda hyperon as a d.u.s configuration.
The
u.d.s configuration is left skewed in both the up-down and the down-strange transition and the sigmao* resonance is
so comprised of parallel spinning eigenquarks for a total spin-momentum of 3/2 and of higher energy content than the u.s.d
and the d.u.s=s.u.d configurations. The decay for all 3/2 spin hyperons is rapid in strong decay, except the saturation state
of the Omega-Minus (Ω-), which decays weakly in about 10-10 seconds. Strong decay is the
time taken for the lightpath to cross the zone of the nuclear interaction in tN=2Re/c~10-23 seconds).
Up-quarks so are quantum geometrically attracted to down- and strange quarks but repelled by
each other, resulting in parallel spin alignments. Down-quarks are more strongly attracted to up-quarks, than to strange
quarks and as the Coulombic electro-charging of inner mesonic rings is by necessity the same as that of outer leptonic rings,
but opposite the kernel charges; the overall interaction of the nuclear scenarios crystallises.
As
the up-quark is geometrically a Kernel-quark at 10-22 meters; the down-quark is K-quark encompassed by a mesonic
inner ring at the d-level of 10-18 meters and the strange-quark becomes a resonance of the down-quark at the Re-Weakon
level of the Higgsian template for the restmass induction.
The material manifestation of quarks and gluons within
the zone of the magnetocharge confinement given by the Higgsian blueprint so should not be described as the interaction
of fundamental particles, but rather as a flux of colourcharges as superpositioned eigenstates marked by the Kernel-InnerRing-OuterRing quantum
geometies.
Two 'point-masses' separated by a distance R so are related classically in Newton's Law
of Gravitation, with this displacement R being the metric connecting the two 'inertia-points'.
In
Quantum Relativity, this metric |R| becomes QUANTISED in some numerical summation, meaning that ANY metric must be an
integral multiple of the minimum spacetime configuration, given in some 'wormhole radius' R*=λ*/2π as the
minimum metric |R*|.
This wormhole scale then depicts a 'Smeared Out Singularity' as the abstract Null-Space
quantised in a string circle radius R*, which can be defined at the Planck-Scale of the Planck-Length as: RP=LP=√(hG/2πc3)
~ 2x10-35 m.
Contemporary M-Theory a la' Edward Witten (Princeton Univerrsity, USA) considers this
as characteristic scale for superstring class I (of both open and closed superstrings manouvering in 10 dimensions); as well
as the scale for other superstrings, defined in various 'open' modalities, attached to Dirichlet branes.
M-Theory is unified in those string dualities, carries with it however a hierarchy of transforming strings in couplings,
which reduce the type I Planck energy to the fifth type of the heterotic superstring class 8x8=64. This fifth class then
becomes METRIC in the norm or magnitude of |R*| and transforms a 'string epoch' of inflation into the classical Big
Bang described by General Relativity coupled to the cosmic evolution of the universe as a Planckian Black Body Radiator undergoing
a thermodynamic and entropic expansion of cooling spacetime expansion into inflationary pre-space of the string hierarchies.
This thermodynamic expansion is both isotropic or equidirectional and homogenous or equidense; because the preceding
hyperstring inflation 'prepared' the classical relativistically metric expansion in the form of the VPE, each Vortex
occupying a VPE* 3-dimensional volumar across the metrically defined extent of the de Brogliean matter wave given in that
string-inflaton.
This means, that the so called long-range Gravitational Interaction, as well as its electromagnetic
coupling; manifest almost INSTANTANEOUSLY in a time-parameter defined in the Quantum Parameters of the minimum metric |R*|
as the LIGHTPATH t*=|R*|/c=3.333..x10-31 seconds.
This realisation then defines the Relativistic
Singularity Big Bang as a Quantum Big Bang and gives the long-range interactions as QUANTISED minimum interactions and
as a Planck- or String- or Loop-Action.
The gauge interaction of Graviton with Gauge Photon then occurs in a NOW-Instanton
of Time, defined in the interval required for the lightpath |R*| to manifest and being equal to the ENTIRE period of the STRING
EPOCH.
So one can say, that Gravity acts instantaneously across the entire universe as a long-range interaction,
yet is propagated at lightspeed c in its form of short-range Quantum Gravity.
The long-range interactions are an
effect of the de Broglie hyperinflation, which manifest the NOW-Instanton as a LINEAR SUMMATION of Time-Integrals. This then
appears as a Linear Flow of Time from the Past to the Future which is 'real' in a superposed sense of the inflated
metric integral to the 'catching up' of the time-flow integral. In the higher-dimensional sense however, this
linear manifesto of temporality is illusionary, as only the NOW-Moment exists as the pre Big Bang scenario of the Null-Space
inflating itself through the five superstring classes.
The universe in the macro-quantum sense is 'holographically'
identical to the micro-quantum sense as its fractal in LOOPED NOW-Time. This physicalised singularity then becomes redefined
as the wormhole minimum spacetime configuration common to all Schwarzschild metrics, defined as the base solution of Einstein's
Field equations in General Relativity. As a major consequence, the inertial universe in terms of spacial extent, can
always be described as a hierarchical 'nesting' of Black Hole 'metric equivalents', where any inertia-density
distribution can be considered 'compacted' as a '3-dimensional 'point-volume' comprised of summations
of the original 'minimum spacetime volumar' and which becomes a Kerr-Ring or Kerr-Torus as a toroidal spacetime volumar
expressed as: {V*=2π2R*3}.
In the higher dimensional sense, any linear
summation of NOW-Times becomes a multidimensional mapping of the circular Now-Time-Interval in quantisation.
Understanding
this pre-metric NATURE of the universe; the Graviton-Gauge Photon interaction can be analysed in detail using the primordial
energy of the MagnetoCharge of the Null-Space.
The Null-Space of the 'Point' abstracted itself as a 'Double-Point'
and so emerged the 1st dimension as the 'displacement interval' between two points as itself.
Having a
'two point', then, by mathematical induction {n:=n+1} creates the 'Number-Line' as a two-directional symmetry
with origin the Null-Space of the cipher 0 say.
This first 'origin' is however unidirectional and the second
dimension of the complex plane emerges as a rotation of the numberline about the origin, thus creating the primordial circle
or quantum loop.
The physical implementation of the second M-dimension of the manifold so must be a circular area
or cross-section radius |R*| and a 3D manifestation for the Witten-Membrane-Space or M-Space must become an orthogonal or
normal dimensional extension of this surface in a 'solid-of-volume' integration of a circle into a sphere across any
diameter.
This directly gives the metric 3D-Space in General Relativity, as the manifold in 2D, say as the Complex
Plane in 'pure' Number Theory; can be a curvilinear surface, say as a normal indentation defining
the Z-axis from the XY-Plane.
Now for any two points to interact in 2D-Space in a PHYSICAL self-intraction of the
double-point in the Null-Space, the two points must be separated by the norm |R*| or an integral multiple thereof in
the complex plane of the second dimension. In other words, the two points must be coplanar with their dimensional generator. But for any two points to interact in 3D-Space in a PHYSICAL self-interaction of the double-point in the Null-Space,
the two points must also include a third point to define the manifold space NORMAL to the plane of the second dimension
of the surface. In other words, the three points cannot be coplanar to define the next and higher dimensional generator
as a NEW ORIGIN Displaced from the planar Null-Point.
The two-dimensional generator so becomes the key to give
a physical meaning to the MagnetoCharge as a triune unity, enabled to interact with its three-dimensional successor.
A simple model for the MagnetoCharge becomes the labeling of the 'Magneto' as a 'Colour', as primary colour
triplets define neutrality in unities of colours and anticolours. The primary 'additive' colour triplet Red-Green-Blue=RGB
has a 'subtractive' anticolour triplet Cyan-Magenta-Yellow or CMY in positive clockwise (or righthanded
up-spin +) cyclicity and a negative anticlockwise (or lefthanded down spin-) cyclicity in its permutations RGB=GBR=BRG and
CMY=MYC=YCM.
The 2D generator so is defined in a circular cross-section RGB(+), with a trisectional of 120 degrees
for each colour segment of the encompassing circle. The radius of this generator is |R*| with a wavelength-perimeter
of norm |λ*|=|2πR*|.
The 3D generator then becomes the RGB(+) generator carrying a 'thickness'
norm |2R*| and so defines a 3-dimensional sphere of radius |R*| and describing the Null-Space as two spherical hemispheres
centred on an origin of the 0-cipher in the complex plane, but projected as two poles in a rotation of the bidirectional 1st
dimensional numberline. In other words, the 'straight' complex plane of 2D has become 'deformed' in bidirectional
symmetric indentation or 'curvature' to create the spherical volumar for the superstring as an encompassing supermembrane.
The multiplicity for this membrane-volumar then assumes the form of 'wavelengths', that is the formation of
cyclindrical tubes in summation, connecting two hemispherical caps in multiples of the lambda-perimeter norm |λ*|=|2πR*|. It is this LINEARISATION of the minimum Einstein Metric as the LIGHTPATH {x=ct=|λ*|t}, which forms the basis for
the Planck Action coupled to the Einstein Action in {E=hf=mc2=hc/λ} and then crystallising in the quantum
formulations, based on the Compton Momentum p=mc=h/λ.
The crucial point here is however the separation of
the hemispherical caps, which carry the polar projections of the 2-dimensional origin of the complex plane, both, into the
3rd dimension of the 'lightpath' of the REAL righthanded (+) as the height of the cylindrical wavelength |λ*|=|2πR*|
and into the lefthanded (-) as the IMAGINARY image. Those labelings simply define a potential extent of lambda summations
towards +ve and -ve Infinity as given in a 1-dimensional numberline. Coming from +∞ implies a decrease (say in energy),
whilst coming from -∞ infers an increase (of energy).
This REALNESS as the IMAGE of the IMAGINARINESS can
now be REDEFINED as a multidimensional extension of the 3rd dimension in NUMERICAL ROOTEXTENSION. Simply adding 9 dimensions
to the Null-Space of the 0th dimension gives the 9 mathematical dimensions as 'Collapsed Singularity Dimensions'
onto the norm of |R*|.
One so defines a physical universe in 12 dimensions as being colocalised with a root-reduced
3-dimensional quantised or discrete space-continuum.
The decisive generators in 2D and 3D so become
'higher dimensional' in 11=2+9 membrane dimensions in Witten's M-Mother-Space and in 12=3+9 volumar brane dimensions
in Vafa's F-Father-Space.
Redefining the 2nd dimension as a root-reduced 11-dimensional membrane-space allows
the two-pointedness of the RGB(+) generator to become one-pointed in the Moebian connection of an 'inside' to an 'outside'
and an accompanying DOUBLING of the twoness in a oneness or a doubling of the circular area encompassed by 1-dimensional mathematical
superstrings as linear perimeters made PHYSICAL as 10-dimensional superstrings and the root-extension 1+9=10.
In
particular the SELFINTERSECTION of TWO POINTS as ONE POINT in NULL-SPACE can now become rigorously defined in terms of the
MagnetoCharges.
Quantum Relativity as a MIRROR SPACIAL SUPERSYMMETRY is not possible in 2 PHYSICALISED dimensions
of the complex plane of 0 width, as there is no way in which either the RGB(+) up-chirality or the RGB(-) down-spin can interact
with each other. The complex plane forms an unbridgable divide or abyss between a circle drawn from the 'imaginary'
left as RGB(+) and a COLOCAL circle drawn from the 'real' right as RGB(+). There is no way for a 1-dimensional linesegment
to curl up into a 2-dimensional loop and to 'travel' to the 'other side' (either from left to right or vice
versa) unless a 3rd dimension is created to allow a Moebius-Twist to connect the twosidedness in a onesidedness. Following
such a twist, the RGB(+) can selfinteract with BGR(-) to create the fundamental VPE template (RB-GG-BR)(0)=(Y-MM-Y)(0) or
its scalar (meaning spinless or 0 angular momentum) permutations YB2Y=CR2C=MG2M and of the
same scale or size as the norm |R*|, but doubling any 'area' of interaction. This doubling can be either denoted
as a 'doubling' or as a 'squaring' in 2R=RR=R2 because the solution for the algebraic expression
2x=x2 has the nontrivial (x≠0) solution x=2.
The Quantum Relativity for a Onesided manifold embedded
in 3D-Space so becomes the Self-Interaction of two INCREASES RGB 'mixing wavefunctions' or superimposing on each
other the self- or eigenstate of the VPE=ZPE of the Null-Spin-State-Space.
However the Quantum Relativity in the
2nd dimension allows a selfinteraction in an IMAGINARY projection of the original selfstate in a mixing of the wavefunctions,
and where one of the wavefunctions assumes the antistate of the other. So if RGB(+) represents the state, the antistate
would be RGB(-) for a 'colour-mixing' of R2G2B2(0) known as a (Anti)Neutrino selfcoupling
at a 180 'inflexion-degree-point' or as a phasal displacement crystallising the Matter-templates (RB.GR.BG)=MYC=YCM=CMY
for the 'degree-interval' {60-120} and the Antimatter-templates (RB.BG.GR)=MCY for the 'degree-interval'
{240-300}. Matter YCM becomes generated from the selfcoupling RGB and in supersymmetry to the selfintersection of the
anti-template BGR in antimatter MCY.
No VPE-Eigenstate is possible in 2D, but a NEW colour triplet, EXTENDING the
MASSLESS Gauge-Eigenstate becomes possible in DEFINING a massless precursor for 'eventual' Higgs-Particles to massinduce
the mass independent BOSONIC 'full-spin' eigenstate as inertial FERMIONIC 'half-spin' selfstates. This
massless precursor for the 'Higgs-Boson' is a SCALAR generator or precursor of the RestMassPhoton or RMP (which
is a nonscalar bosonic form of the Higgs-Boson, albeit massless and directly linked to the definition of the Colour-Charges
and the massinduced Weakons (W- for matter YCM and W+ for antimatter MCY and the neutral Zo as (Anti)Neutrino
Coupling).
3. Gauge-Vortex Gravitons in Modular String-Duality!
4. The Positronium Exemplar!
We can now investigate the Gauge-Bosonic Photon - Graviton
Interaction in detail and using the Creation of a basic matter-antimatter coupling and its subsequent pair-annihilation in
the form of Positronium in some detail.
To be continued
|