Search All of the Math Forum:
Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by
Drexel University or The Math Forum.
|
|
|
|
charge is geometry and spin is fitting together two hemispheres
Chapt13.4.03 Charge and spin #1018 New Physics #1138 ATOM TOTALITY 5th ed
Posted:
Nov 21, 2012 3:34 PM
|
|
On Nov 21, 9:23 am, Timothy Sutter <a202...@lycos.com-> wrote:
> > > > anyway, you can play with those figures
> > > > to get them to look right in avariable width font,
> > > > i just haven't felt like messing with it.
>
> > > > > > [fixed width text] <======
>
> > > > > > _+m"m+_
> > > > > > Jp qh
> > > > > > O O
> > > > > > Yb dY
> > > > > > "Y5m2Y"
> > this one should be a variable width ellipse...
>
equator for electrons is deleted
> 99999999999999999999999 99999999999999999999
> 9999999999999 9999999999999
> 99999999 99999999
> 99999 99999
> 999 999
> 99 99
> 9 9
poles for electron
> 9 9
> 99 99
> 999 999
> 99999 99999
> 99999999 99999999
> 9999999999999 9999999999999
> 9999999999999999999999 999999999999999999999
>
> now you see why i don't feel like messing with it...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > > yes, i swiped the circle from somebody in ascii art,
> > > but i forgot who it was so i can't cite them.
>
> > > oh, no, here;
>
> > >http://incredibleart.org/links/ascii/new_faq.html
>
> > > i made the ellipes myself
>
> > > they're fibonachi sets...
>
> > > > > > 3333333333
> > > > > > 333 333
> > > > > > 33 33
> > > > > > 3 3
> > > > > > 3 3
> > > > > > 33 33
> > > > > > 333 333
> > > > > > 3333333333
Hi Tim, thanks for that ascii art, it is very helpful and useful to
newcomers for ideas.
Since yesterday, I have an improvement. What I am heading for is a
relationship of charge to spin. In Old Physics, charge and spin had no
relationship whatsoever, but totally independent.
And, in Old Physics, one can immediately see that their spin was
incorrect because they had more than three types of spin whereas they
had only three types of charge in total. If you know anything about
quantum mechanics, you should be at least smart enough to realize that
charge cannot be smaller of a system type than that of the last
quantum number m_s of spin. If the world of physics has but only three
types of charge, then the world of physics has but only three types of
spin. A smart physicist would eventually know this, but there were few
smart physicists in the past 112 years.
I have overcome this problem of the two protons and two electrons
where one forms a hemisphere and the other a sphere. By hemisphere, I
mean semi-sphere, or half a sphere. The electron is a Hyperbolic
geometry and forms a hemisphere with the pole deleted and the equator
deleted.
The problem yesterday was that the proton was a full sphere, the
electron a hemisphere with pole deleted and equator deleted. And I
thought that the two electrons in helium become the undersphere of 1
single proton. So the two electrons fit inside 1 sphere that was 1
proton.
So I had to overcome that problem. And what I thought was a solution
is that the electron and electron neutrino fit inside the sphere that
was the proton.
But that causes there still to be a huge problem, because the proton
has spin 1/2 also and so why should the proton be a full sphere if the
electron is but a semisphere? Well it has to be a full sphere because
it is Elliptic geometry whereas the electron is Hyperbolic geometry.
Now we can still have the electron be a full sphere with parts deleted
and still by Hyperbolic geometry.
And that is the solution to this vexing problem, where the full
electron is a sphere with poles and equator deleted resting inside a
proton sphere. For the highest probability of finding an electron in
an atom is smack in the center of the nucleus-- inside a proton.
But it causes another problem in how, how, two electrons can form a
spin up and spin down pair in a suborbital. Almost as if a electron
resides inside a proton as a pair of charges of -1 with +1. So, having
removed one problem I find myself challenged by another problem. How
do electrons pair in suborbitals such as the s orbital or the 3
suborbitals of the p orbital?
I am guided by a fact of Chemistry that is very obvious to anyone who
has studied chemistry but which is rather hidden from perception until
someone needs this sort of fact. One can take a poll of all chemistry
teachers and find that all of them knew this hidden fact but was never
able to draw upon it. The fact I speak of is the fact that helium is
one of the inert gases and helium is oddball to the inert gases
because helium is a s orbital while the other inert gases are a p
orbital. Helium is the most stable element but the inert gases are the
most stable configuration. This fact gives us the clue as to how two
electrons can form a pair, much like what a electron and proton form a
pair by having the electron inside a proton.
I am millimetering closer to the goal of establishing a relationship
between charge and spin.
Google's New-Newsgroups censors AP posts and halted a proper archiving
of author, but Drexel's Math Forum does ?not and my posts in archive
form is seen here:
?http://mathforum.org/kb/profile.jspa?userID=499986
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
|
|
|
|
