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:
solving spin as a molecular transverse wave #1250 New Physics #1370 ATOM TOTALITY 5th ed
Replies:
6
Last Post:
Feb 22, 2013 3:42 AM




solving spin as a molecular transverse wave #1250 New Physics #1370 ATOM TOTALITY 5th ed
Posted:
Feb 22, 2013 3:31 AM


On Feb 22, 1:36 am, Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archime...@gmail.com> wrote: > Alright, I want progress on restmass, charge, spin, > Space in these last 50 or so pages. > > Now I feel confident that charge is "geometrical space" so that if we > have 1 charge we have hyperbolic geometry, and if we have +1 charge > we have elliptical geometry and if we have 0 charge we have Euclidean > flat geometry. > > So that a photon of 0 charge has Euclidean flat geometry and we see > that in the Double Transverse Wave of the photon: > > E > M+ M > E+ > > Now we need a double transverse wave for the photon in order to have > its speed constant for radio waves through gamma rays, for if photons > were single transverse waves the speed of a radio wave would be far > smaller than the speed of a gamma ray. It is destructive interference > in the double transverse wave that preserves Special Relativity. > > Now I suspect I have restmass complete or almost completely resolved. > The idea here is that we have a transverse wave, not a double one but > a single transverse wave for the electron and proton so that restmass > is the tendency for the leading front of the wave to curl up and > become a circle for the electron and a ellipsoid for the proton. > > So for the electron it is a transverse wave that looks like this: > > E > M+ > > Now I used to think it was like this: > > E > M+ M > > but I now realize that you would have destructive interference along > the horizontal and not the vertical. > > Now the proton would be this: > > E+ > M > > Now I need to be able to fill in more M's for the proton than electron > because it has more restmass. > > Now for spin, I have to harken back to the lodestone and bar magnet > and the only form of EM that is a large scale display of perpetual > motion and perpetual energy. No such large scale display of perpetual > energy for electricity. And magnetism is the alignment of spins of the > electrons in iron atoms, called ferromagnetism. > > So what is going on with spin? Is it that electrons are single > transverse waves such as this: > > E > M+ > > and when they fill a suborbital become this: > > M+ > E > M+ > E > > which is sort of a molecule of two electrons? > > Or is it that when two electrons fill a suborbital > that one of the magnetic monopoles M changes from a M+ to a M. > > So spin seems to be as before, a direction, whereas charge is a > geometry, spin is a direction of geometry. > > And probably the most troubling of all those concepts is Space. I have > space as magnetic monopoles M. And I have the neutrino as a > longitudinal wave of monopoles M. But unlike a sound wave, here the > neutrino longitudinal wave is a unidirectional wave, sort of like a > laser wave of longitudinal wave. > > So I have a lot of things to solve before page 1300.
Alright, I have just 50 more pages for New Physics to reach page 1300 and where I automatically stop writing on New Physics.
I need to solve spin, restmass, charge, and Space in that last 50 pages.
So let me try to place electrons into suborbitals, and we remember the rules that electrons enter suborbitals alone and never paired until all suborbitals have one electron, Hund's Rule.
So we have say 5 suborbitals and 5 electrons and so all suborbitals would have just 1 electron, now we have say 6 electrons, then one of the suborbitals has 2 electrons.
Now the question is, how would 2 electrons, each looking like this E M+
how would those two electrons fill the suborbital? Perhaps we gain insight into spin by answering that question. For it is stated in physics that one of the electrons is spin up and the other spin down.
So perhaps we can combine two electron transverse waves and learn more about spin.
Could it be that a spin up electron is this transverse wave:
E M+
and a spin down electron is this transverse wave:
M+ E
So that the two form a molecularwave of this:
E M+ M+ E
Now that is not a double transverse wave as the photon, but rather a bounded together of two single transverse waves.
So let me think about that, and if it is accurate, then spin would be a direction orientation, relative to a photon double transverse wave. Where spin would be two single transverse waves combining to form a moleculartransverse wave.

Google's archives are topheavy in hatespew from searchengine 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 Plutoniumhttp://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electrondotcloud are galaxies



