The Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: concurrence of Fusion Barrier Principle with total-ionization
Chapt13.40072 Strong Nuclear force as a chemical bond leads to
total-ionization #504 New Physics #624 ATOM TOTALITY 5th ed

Replies: 2   Last Post: May 9, 2012 10:58 AM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com

Posts: 18,572
Registered: 3/31/08
Chapt13.40072 Fusion Barrier Priniciple concurs with total-ionization
#505 New Physics #625 ATOM TOTALITY 5th ed

Posted: May 9, 2012 1:51 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On May 8, 3:57 pm, Archimedes Plutonium
<plutonium.archime...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Chapt13.40072 Concurrence of Fusion Barrier Principle with total-
> ionization
>
> There is probably a better word to use than concurrence, but it is the
> best I can think of at this moment. The idea here is that of
> compliance or concurrence or agreement.
>
> The Fusion Barrier Principle is the idea that if all of physics comes
> from axioms that has
> all of chemistry plus the Maxwell Equations, for if you had chemistry
> by itself would be chemistry, but if you add the Maxwell Equations
> (include Dirac Equation) on top of all of chemistry you end up with
> all of Physics. And the fusion-barrier principle is the realization
> that the Faraday law packs more energy than does the Coulomb law. The
> Coulomb law versus the Faraday law, if Faraday law has 1 unit of
> energy then the Coulomb law has 2/3 unit of energy at best. A tokamak
> is a machine that uses the Faraday law to control every aspect of the
> machine and the fusion that occurs needs to overcome the Coulomb law,
> but the Coulomb law is always 2/3 energy while the Faraday law is
> always 1 unit of energy. The proof simply realizes that a sphere
> inside a enclosing cylinder is 2/3 volume or 2/3 surface area.
>
> Now we ask, with our new insight of what the Strong Nuclear Force is,
> for it is a chemical bond of proton to neutron, much like the metallic
> bond that rhenium atoms have for other rhenium atoms for its boiling
> point is so huge. So we ask how is the
> Fusion Barrier Principle understood and explained in terms of this
> Strong Nuclear Force between proton and neutron as a chemical bond? It
> is explained that at very hot plasmas, such as in tokamaks we reach a
> level of heat inside that plasma that it begins to split apart the
> nucleus of atoms and returns them into being hydrogen ions rather than
> the fusion into helium. There is a level of heat that deuterium or
> tritium rather becomes hydrogen ions rather than forming helium.
>
> So that is the concurrence, of where Faraday's law packs 1 unit of
> energy and the Coulomb law at best packs only 2/3 unit of energy,
> versus the particle view, where
> at a certain temperature and heat of plasma, the deuterium and tritium
> are more prone to disintegration into hydrogen ions rather than fusing
> to become helium.
>


Let us for a moment reflect on the implications of fusion and total-
ionization.
If the Strong Nuclear force is a chemical bond, would mean that
whereever
there is a bonding of proton to neutron there is also its opposite of
a breaking
apart, or normally called radioactive and so that heat can be a cause
of
radioactivity. So inside Star plasmas, the heat gives rise to breaking
apart
the proton bonded to neutron. And so the Fusion Barrier Principle in
terms
of particle physics is the noting or acknowledgement that in a fusion
environment
a fused particle may not survive long enough before it is stripped
back down
into a hydrogen ion. Some tokamak's heat rival the heat of the Sun
plasma and
so as frequently as tokamak fuel is turned into helium, many of those
helium
atoms or ions are turned back into deuteron or hydrogen ion.

But this leads to another idea, in that the Earth core is very hot,
perhaps not a
plasma hot but hot enough that free protons and free neutrons would
collide and
bond into forming a deuteron and then deuterons colliding and forming
helium.
Once helium is formed, the chances of survival are much greater in the
Earth core
than if in the Sun's core. So do we notice a abundance of helium
coming from the
Earth's core?

Also, we notice that the inner planets all have iron metal cores. So
it is likely that such
huge amount of iron in those cores was a process of billions of years
of fusion going
on in the cores building up heavier elements up to iron and the iron
surviving the heat
of breaking up those bonds.

In Old Physics we carried around the notion that the Strong Nuclear
force was immune to heat
and that once fused, there is nothing to break them apart except for
the Weak Nuclear which was
unrelated to the Strong Nuclear. And in Old Physics that notion made
us think there was no fusion
except inside of shining stars. That there was no fusion going on
inside of Earth or the other planets.
With the Strong Nuclear Force as a chemical bond, we have to re-think
the cores of planets, in that
much fusion goes on in those planetary cores.

Archimedes Plutonium
http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies




Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© The Math Forum at NCTM 1994-2018. All Rights Reserved.