Search All of the Math Forum:
Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by
Drexel University or The Math Forum.
|
|
|
|
deriving neutron rest-mass Chapt15.38 Maxwell Equations as axioms of
physics solves rest-mass #1151 New Physics #1271 ATOM TOTALITY 5th ed
Posted:
Jan 13, 2013 6:13 PM
|
|
Let me try deriving the neutron rest-mass. The proton is 938 MeV and
neutron is
939.6 for a ratio of almost 1. So this is probably a very easy
derivation for all we need is two Lambda or Sigma particles that decay
into proton or neutron and whose mean life in seconds are virtually
identical.
Now looking in Halliday & Resnick, 1986 Appendix F, I see the Lambda
and Xi
particles almost identical in mean life of 2.5*10^-10 seconds and
2.9*10^-10 seconds. I see the Sigma minus of 1.4*10^-10 almost equal
to the Omega at 1.3*10^-10 seconds.
So what is the message I am trying to draw out of this. The message is
that someone could play the very same silly game with photons that was
played for composite particles of electrons, and protons. In New
Physics there are only three elementary fundamental particles--
proton, electron and photon and the neutrino is pure wave. All the
composite particles are fancy dressed up versions of protons or
electrons and they are unimportant whereas the proton and electron are
important.
If we wanted to play a silly game we could look at the photons and
call the radio wave a radio particle and then the microwave a
microwave particle and the red photon a red particle and the green
photon a green particle and pretend these are as different as
pretending the Lambda, Sigma, Omega are different and fundamental
particles when they are not so. All the photons are one batch of
particles. All the baryons are just extra dressed with energy protons.
All the leptons are just extra fancy dressed electrons.
An analogy to biology serves well here. In biology, every human is a
human. But if a physicist of the Standard Model had his way about it,
he would classify a cowboy wearing a hat as a elementary and
fundamental human and far different from a business man wearing a suit
and tie, as if he were not a human and a new species. To a good and
true scientist, all humans are just humans regardless of the
superficial clothes they are wearing. To a Standard Model physicist,
that wants to pander Quark theory, then how dressed up a human is,
turns him or her into a fundamentally different species from another
dressed up human.
Now I need a chapter for the Glossary of concepts and terms of
Physics. Unfortunately this chapter is late in this edition of the
book, and in future editions it should be near the beginning of the
textbook. A glossary helps the logic of the scientist at work, and
helps to avert contradictions.
In my derivation above, I really do not derive the value of 939 MeV
for the neutron, provided if the mass of the proton is unknown. So let
me wrestle with this concept of mean life and the concept of Space
being either Euclidean, Elliptic or Hyperbolic and where you have
such
Euclidean = Elliptic unioned with Hyperbolic
The proton is in Elliptic geometry and the electron is in Hyperbolic.
The neutron is unstable outside the atom and decays into a proton and
electron. So Euclidean geometry
in the neutron is unstable whereas Euclidean geometry of the photon is
very stable. So that question has to be addressed.
But let me start with a concept of rest-mass*(mean-life) =s for
something. So we have r*m = s. For the neutron we have 939MeV * 918
seconds = 8.6*10^5 MeVseconds
Now for the muon, this new concept of r*m we have:
105MeV*(2*10^-6 seconds) = 2*10^-4 MeVseconds
However, if we do that for the K+ meson of its rest mass
approx 500 MeV and its mean life of approx 1.2*10^-8 seconds we get a
magnitude of 6 *10^-6 MeVseconds.
So that somewhere between a muon and a K+ meson sits a electron-type
particle that matches the neutron's r*m value.
You see, in New Physics, charge is the three geometries and the
Maxwell Equations are the three geometries and the interplay between
those 3 geometries. So that a proton or neutron, gives up Space in
order to have more rest-mass which is volume-of-Space. Whereas a
electron wants a lot of space and gives up most of its rest-mass in
order to have a lot of space.
In the formula: Euclidean = Elliptic unioned Hyperbolic we can rewrite
that as Neutron = proton + electron.
When the neutron is inside the atom nucleus, the nuclear electron has
little space that it had outside the atom and that nuclear electron
goes into the Strong Nuclear force of binding together the other
protons.
In my next post, I need to elaborate on what are lines in Euclidean
versus Elliptic and Hyperbolic geometries. Because some formulas of
physics are Euclidean geometry such as the Ohm's law of V = iR, but
others such as E = 1/2 mv^2 or E = mc^2 are Elliptic geometry lines.
So in New Physics, we separate out which equations belong to Euclidean
geometry and thus charge of 0 and which belong to Elliptic geometry
and thus of charge +1 and involving protons and which belong to
Hyperbolic geometry of charge -1 and thus involving the electron.
In Old Physics, no-one ever payed any attention or ever recognized
that formulas and equations of physics have a domain in which they
arise and come from. Equations of square or square roots are not lines
of Euclidean geometry and are lines of either Elliptic or Hyperbolic
geometry. And that was a huge fault and mistake of Old Physics, to
think that all their equations were Euclidean Geometry borne and
relevance.
--
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
|
|
|
|
