Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

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


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

Topic: missing neutrino energy Pauli's 1930s #1207 New Physics #1327 ATOM
TOTALITY 5th ed

Replies: 5   Last Post: Feb 9, 2013 5:38 PM

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: 9,624
Registered: 3/31/08
evidence that neutrinos are magnetic monopoles and longitudinal waves
#1209 New Physics #1329 ATOM TOTALITY 5th ed

Posted: Feb 7, 2013 5:47 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On Feb 7, 4:28 pm, Archimedes Plutonium
<plutonium.archime...@gmail.com> wrote:
(snipped)
>
> http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/particles/proton.html#c4
>


--- quoting from that gsu edu website ---
The fact that the electrons produced from the neutron decay had
continuous distributions of energy and momentum was a clear indication
that there was another particle emitted along with the electron and
proton. It had to be a neutral particle and in certain decays carried
almost all the energy and momentum of the decay. This would not have
been so extraordinary except for the fact that when the electron had
its maximum kinetic energy, it accounted for all the energy Q
available for the decay. So there was no energy left over to account
for the mass energy of the other emitted particle. The early
experimenters were faced with the dilemma of a particle which could
carry nearly all the energy and momentum of the decay but which had no
charge and apparently no mass!
--- end quote ---

So much of true and bright physics is in the art of correct
interpretation of facts and data. And here is a case that from 1930 to
2013, no physicist was able to correctly interpret the facts
surrounding beta decay in neutron decay.

The curve is continuous, granted it is continuous. What that tells us,
is that Space is involved, not just another particle, a new particle
but that the surrounding Space of the neutron decay is involved.

And because the electron can carry away all the energy, leaving no
energy for the neutrino, means that the Neutrino is the same as
Magnetic Monopoles.

The reverse also tells us more, that the neutrino can carry away with
all the kinetic energy leaving the electron none. That tells us the
new particle cannot be a photon with a double transverse wave but must
be magnetic monopoles with a longitudinal wave.

In order to have a new particle with no energy at all, energyless,
means the particle has to be Space itself to have a spin 1/2
conservation law preserved. So the new particle is Space and that
means magnetic monopoles.

Now, has anyone thought out what a spin of a magnetic monopole has to
be to reconcile with the rest of true physics? Because in the beta
decay, I can safely say the magnetic monopole must be spin 1/2.

--

Google's archives are top-heavy in hate-spew from search-engine-
bombing. Only Drexel's Math Forum has done a excellent, simple and
fair archiving of AP posts for the past 15 years as 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




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

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.