CATEGORY:
Wandering Towards a Goal Essay Contest (2016-2017)
[back]
TOPIC:
The Relation of Particle Numbers to Atomic Numbers by Jeff Yee, Yingbo Zhu, and Guofu Zhou
[refresh]
Login or
create account to post reply or comment.
Author Jeff Yee wrote on Feb. 17, 2017 @ 20:42 GMT
Essay AbstractIn this paper, we take the first steps of simplifying particles into a linear function that organizes particles based on their particle number, similar to how atoms are arranged by atomic number. This repeats the method that was used to organize atomic elements and create the Periodic Table of Elements in the 1800s. Now, the same process can be used for subatomic particles. The solution to linearize particles into a predictable function is not as simple as atomic elements, but it does exist. As with everything in physics, mathematics describes the universe in which we live and the same holds true for subatomic particles. We will introduce an equation that fits particles into a function that enables the prediction of future particle energies. It also predicts the exact mass of the elusive neutrino. Particles are first organized by particle numbers, similar to atomic numbers in the Periodic Table of Elements, and then charted against their known CODATA energy levels. The results will show similarities between particles and atomic elements – numbers where both are known to be more stable than their counterparts.
Author BioMr. Jeff Yee (M.S. Management, B.S. Mechanical Engineering) and Dr. Yingbo Zhu (PhD Electrical Engineering) are visiting professors at South China Normal University, holding full-time roles in the electronics industry at ZTE and China Telecom respectively. Dr. Guofu Zhou (PhD Physics) is the founder and director of the Electronic Paper Display Institute at South China Normal University.
Download Essay PDF File
Author Jeff Yee wrote on Feb. 18, 2017 @ 01:12 GMT
New to the FQXi community, thanks to an invite from Declan Traill. It's been a pleasure reading through some of the essays (and rating), and it's great to see a forum such as this.
Yingbo Zhu replied on Feb. 18, 2017 @ 16:52 GMT
The same to me. Thank you Jeff, our essay is being post on this wonderful forum. I look forward to seeing more comments...
report post as inappropriate
Steve Dufourny replied on Feb. 25, 2017 @ 08:59 GMT
Hello also Dr Zhu,tell hello also to Dr Zhou,you ahev pondered a general relevant papper.
Indeed this forum is wonderful the first innovant transparent Platform of theoretical physics, revolutionary for the global sciences community.China nd USA speaking together I like :) because universalism and altruism are the torchs of truth after all.China and USA even have the keys in hands to harmonise this planet.They can together reasure this sphere earth.Tell it to government :) we liberate the funds for this industrialisation of our solar system, and all wins without exception.Hope that USA CHINA G20 ONU WORLD BANK are conbscient in the high sphères of power that it is time to do it before the adds of several chaotical expoentials.....It is now in fact that it must be made.
Best
report post as inappropriate
Author Jeff Yee replied on Feb. 25, 2017 @ 15:13 GMT
Thank you for your comment. This is indeed a good opportunity for China and the US to work together. :)
Steve Dufourny replied on Mar. 2, 2017 @ 14:11 GMT
You are welcome,I hope of all my heart.That will reasure this planet.
All the best :)
report post as inappropriate
hide replies
Gary D. Simpson wrote on Feb. 18, 2017 @ 02:47 GMT
Jeff,
Welcome to FQXi. You present an interesting correlation. It seems to me that the true meaning of what you present is that the neutrino is the most fundamental building block of particles. It is very curious to me that the summation that you present is based upon the difference between the cubes of successive integers. I will need to ponder that for quite awhile.
Best Regards and Good Luck,
Gary Simpson
report post as inappropriate
Author Jeff Yee replied on Feb. 18, 2017 @ 03:00 GMT
Thanks Gary. This does indeed make the neutrino an interesting particle to study. I appreciate the feedback and hope you enjoy your weekend.
Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Feb. 18, 2017 @ 08:12 GMT
Dear Yee, Zhu and Zhou,
My complements for a nice research essay.
Good essay on trying to fit a nice co-relation between particle numbers and their known CODATA energy levels.
Your words … “We will introduce an equation that fits particles into a function that enables the prediction of future particle energies. It also predicts the exact mass of the elusive neutrino. Particles are first organized by particle numbers, similar to atomic numbers in the Periodic Table of Elements, and then charted against their known CODATA energy levels. ”... are good.
Your additional conclusions are Good.... “Focusing on the first 50 particle numbers, two more findings are observed:
• The stable particles (neutrino, electron and proton) fit exactly on the trendline. Although this may be merely a coincidence because the pion and tau electron also fit on the trendline, yet both of these particles decay.
• The leptons (neutrino and electron family of particles) are found at particle numbers that match stable atomic elements. In atomic elements, these are known as magic numbers. The first five magic numbers are 2, 8, 20, 28 and 50. This leaves the possibility of finding a neutrino particle at K=2 since this energy value does not match a known particle.”
Have look at my essay also it is also a research based essay…
Best wishes…
=snp. Gupta
report post as inappropriate
Author Jeff Yee replied on Feb. 18, 2017 @ 16:49 GMT
Yes, I will take a look at it now. Originally, I had focused on essays more similar to the research I did with my colleagues, but now I have gone through those that were similar, I will expand and read more. I'll take a look at yours now.
Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Feb. 19, 2017 @ 06:58 GMT
I just gave my reply below as a new post, Sorry I did not post them here
best
=snp.gupta
report post as inappropriate
George Kirakosyan wrote on Feb. 18, 2017 @ 08:23 GMT
Dear Jeff,
Your comment really is beautiful, thank you so much - our command becomes more!
Previously I can say that I have nothing against to neutrino, the electron is preferable because it is always under our hands (I mean it is much easy to detect and to study). Moreover, the neutrino does not have charge and mag. momentum that makes so much difficult to catch and to identify it. Principally, if we can to explain what is any particle on a 100% then we can understand almost everything!
I will study your work and to return again after short time!
Best wishes!
George
report post as inappropriate
John-Erik Persson wrote on Feb. 18, 2017 @ 10:50 GMT
Jeff
Thank you for good words about my paper.
I have also read your brilliant paper. I found it very interesting and have given it high points. I will read it several times since I do not know so much about the standard model.
Good luck.
Regards _____________________________ John-Erik
report post as inappropriate
Branko L Zivlak wrote on Feb. 18, 2017 @ 21:20 GMT
Dear Yee, Zhu and Zhou,
Approach is very interesting and promising further progress. It is very interesting to use K^4. This is common known for temperatures. I also get ^4 in other processes. How did you get K^4?
Have you an explanation for the gap between particle numbers 72 and 106 at figure 2.
Think of this. K=1 could be some hypothetical particle, not necessary neutrino. Then for neutrino K=2. Maybe it gives better results. My essay also is governed by mathematics.
Regards,
Branko
report post as inappropriate
Author Jeff Yee replied on Feb. 18, 2017 @ 21:33 GMT
You are correct that K=1 does not have to be the neutrino. It is possible that it is K=2, but that means the rest mass of the neutrino will be higher than the current range when it is ultimately found. It is a possibility.
The value for K^4 comes from a paper:
Particle Energy and Interaction. It derives the rest energy of particles based on three dimensional standing waves. The particle number (K) affects the amplitude of this standing wave in each of the three dimensions (K^3). But the particle number also has an effect on the number of standing waves in the particle (K). The latter is assumed to be the particle radius where standing waves transition to traveling waves.
I'll take a look at your essay later today and will also send it to my colleagues. Thanks for the feedback Branko.
Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Feb. 19, 2017 @ 06:54 GMT
Dear Jeff Yee,
Thank you for your encouraging post on my essay. I am reproducing my reply here for your immediate perusal ...............
Thank you for your interest on my essay and good question...
Main problem was the length of the paper. I have to delete many related paragraphs to adjust for the acceptable length.
In this essay, the property of intent of the...
view entire post
Dear Jeff Yee,
Thank you for your encouraging post on my essay. I am reproducing my reply here for your immediate perusal ...............
Thank you for your interest on my essay and good question...
Main problem was the length of the paper. I have to delete many related paragraphs to adjust for the acceptable length.
In this essay, the property of intent of the biological world and the property of reproduction are shown to be present as properties of the universe. These properties were deducted from UGF- the Universal gravitational force acting on any mass, and the fact that Galaxies originate and quench at different times and at different distances irrespective of Bigbang. The Universe behaves as though it is having its own mind.
…. Intent…..
‘….. 1.1 About Dynamic Universe Model: In our Dynamic Universe every mass is moving in a direction and goal determined universal gravitational force (UGF) as the indomitable resultant vector of gravitational forces acted by all the other bodies in the Universe. This UGF is not constant force acting in only one direction. This resultant UGF vector force is varying according to ever varying dynamic movements and positions of all the masses in the Universe from time to time. In Dynamic Universe Model, this UGF is the fundamental concept; this model calculates this force “UGF” from moment to moment using its mathematical laws on each and every mass in the SITA simulations. In this way many present-day unsolved physics problems were solved. This method is different from conventional two body problem solution.[10]……’
This UGF sets the goals for every Galaxy or for every mass..
…… Reproduction……
Galaxies take birth in different times and quench (die) in different times in different directions. But the positioning of Galaxies is not random, they will come to a stable ‘Dynamic Equilibrium’ positions due to UGF is the main theme.
Universe is having Galaxies, which take birth and death is happening. In the Cosmos the biological world is also a part in which is reproduction is taking place. The same thing is happening in the Galaxies. In this essay this reproduction ability is emphasized.
Computer simulations were shown to support the paper.
Here Goals were created by the Mathematics of Dynamic Universe Model in the form of Universal Gravitational Force (UGF). This UGF is the total resultant force on any mass ( here in this case the individual Galaxy) which decides the path to be followed in the next instance. That is how the time is pulling every Galaxy..
Many papers and books were published on Dynamic universe Model by the author on unsolved problems of present day Physics, for example ‘Absolute Rest frame of reference is not necessary’ (1994) , ‘Multiple bending of light ray can create many images for one Galaxy: in our dynamic universe’, About “SITA” simulations, ‘Missing mass in Galaxy is NOT required’, “New mathematics tensors without Differential and Integral equations”, “Information, Reality and Relics of Cosmic Microwave Background”, “Dynamic Universe Model explains the Discrepancies of Very-Long-Baseline Interferometry Observations.”, in 2015 ‘Explaining Formation of Astronomical Jets Using Dynamic Universe Model, ‘Explaining Pioneer anomaly’, ‘Explaining Near luminal velocities in Astronomical jets’, ‘Observation of super luminal neutrinos’, ‘Process of quenching in Galaxies due to formation of hole at the center of Galaxy, as its central densemass dries up’, “Dynamic Universe Model Predicts the Trajectory of New Horizons Satellite Going to Pluto” etc., are some more papers from the Dynamic Universe model. Four Books also were published. Book1 shows Dynamic Universe Model is singularity free and body to collision free, Book 2, and Book 3 are explanation of equations of Dynamic Universe model. Book 4 deals about prediction and finding of Blue shifted Galaxies in the universe
Additionally you please have a look at the CONCLUSION of the essay and please see above... my reply to the question by...
Al Schneider wrote on Jan. 27, 2017 @ 07:59 GMT
and my reply to...
Harry Hamlin Ricker III wrote on Jan. 31, 2017 @ 14:49 GMT
I hope it will clarify your question, if not we can discuss again
Best regards
=snp.gupta
view post as summary
report post as inappropriate
Author Jeff Yee replied on Feb. 19, 2017 @ 19:16 GMT
Thanks for taking the time to address my questions and glad you posted it here too (I don't think I get notifications for replies on a post on someone else's paper). You've addressed it andI'll also go back and read the comments field too per your suggestion.
George Kirakosyan wrote on Feb. 19, 2017 @ 08:03 GMT
Dear Jeff Yee
I have study your work (Particle energy .... in vixra.org).
I am very impressed with your huge work and I find very right things there, concerning to a wave-field common essence of everything. Particularly, You correctly have explained the double slit interference of particles (by the way it is much coincide with the mine!) and many useful things also are there.
However, I am forced to say some my regrets also. The standing wave concept of particles is really are very right and this will become much more productive for you if you will start from VORTEX NATURE of field and waves (with your phenomenal ability to working!) I just friendly recommend you carefully to study my works (not now, of course). I think your level will allow you to catch some very necessary trifles from there in short time. Then you can to develop your nice ideas more successfully!
Good wishes!
report post as inappropriate
Author Jeff Yee replied on Feb. 19, 2017 @ 19:08 GMT
George, I'd be happy to take a look. Can you send me a URL to the works?
Joe Fisher wrote on Feb. 19, 2017 @ 15:51 GMT
Dear Mr. Yee and Professors Yingbo and Guofu Zhou,
Please excuse me for I have no intention of disparaging in any way any part of your essay.
I merely wish to point out that “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler. Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955) Physicist & Nobel Laureate.”
Only nature could produce a reality so simple, a single cell amoeba could deal with it.
The real Universe must consist only of one unified visible infinite physical surface occurring in one infinite dimension, that am always illuminated by infinite non-surface light.
A more detailed explanation of natural reality can be found in my essay, SCORE ONE FOR SIMPLICITY. I do hope that you will read my essay and perhaps comment on its merit.
Joe Fisher, Realist
report post as inappropriate
Francis Duane Moore replied on Feb. 19, 2017 @ 23:18 GMT
Jeff, Your Table 1 shows the "missing mass problem". The total energy at the beginning of an atomic transition does not equal the end of transition energy from one element to another. The energy is described as "binding energy", and has never been properly described. The energy is "lost" meaning at the quantum field level in TPICT my essay connections are lost in the geometry of reconnection in the magnetic field. any CODATA values are misrepresented as to the influence of gravity at the quantum level.
I hope this is helpful,I believe we are getting closer to the basic unit of operation Sincerely Francis
report post as inappropriate
Author Jeff Yee replied on Feb. 19, 2017 @ 23:53 GMT
Francis, I want to make sure I understand this comment correctly from your post... "The total energy at the beginning of an atomic transition does not equal the end of transition energy from one element to another". Can you give an example?
Francis Duane Moore replied on Feb. 22, 2017 @ 20:47 GMT
study binding energy/ Where is it assigned? The before event or the later event,
report post as inappropriate
Steve Dufourny wrote on Feb. 20, 2017 @ 06:47 GMT
Hello Mr Yee,
Congratulations for your essay.I see a relevant extrapolation towards this quantum weakest force this gravity,we see a relevant general method to find this force.But if I can and with humility Mr Yee, I beleive strongly that we must consider this quantum gravitation in an other way than our electromagnetic model,our standard model.This quantum gravity tending to infinity gas a problme.And I beleive that we must consider it not baryonic nor relativistic.This force so cannot be an emergent electromagnetic force.If the cosm and quant 3D sphères turns, it is not due to themro and heat it seems to me.Now imagine the dark matter the supermassive BHs in the cold and that these BHs produce these particles of gravitation and that these particles are cold and speeder than c.See that in this reasoning, the aether is gravitation from the central cosm singularity, the central biggest BH creating the speeder spherons,I named them like that.That is why I have invented this equation about matter energy.E=mc²+ml² we have a road towards the entire infinite gravitational entropy Mr Yee in fact.This cold seems essential.We have not a problem of equivalence when we consider the number of BHs and the number of spherons,because spherons are speeder and more numerous than photons simply.This gravitational aerthe from this cosm singularity is connected with our quantum cnetral singularities,that is why I have inserted quantum BHs with forces stronger than nuclear gluonic forces and spherons encoded them weaker than photns of our electromagnetism.So we can see this standard model encircled by this ngravitation.I loved your work permitting to rank better our standard model.It is very relevant and thanks for sharing your works and researchs.That improves our datas,you complete the postulates and laws.I am wishing you all the best Mr Yee in this contest ,good luck from belgium.
report post as inappropriate
Steve Dufourny replied on Feb. 20, 2017 @ 06:53 GMT
Sorry for my errors in English,I would say the quantum gravity tending to infinity has a problem of equivalence.
all my reasoning implies that photons are not the main primordial informations, but spherons yes when we consider that a photon is a spheron coded with its intrinsic comportments of equilibriums of this heat by this cold.What I find relevant is thefact to consider the spherons like a serie of spherical volumes from the central biggest spherical volume.A primordial serie appears in logic, this serie is p^robably the same than our cosmological serie in its pure finite serie, its pure serie of uniquenss,between 1 and x.See that in this logic ,the gravitation is the real chief orchestra because this gravity encodes gravity and that ourn standard model is, just like a fuel,a system of electromagntic photonic dynamics simply.
All the best
report post as inappropriate
Author Jeff Yee replied on Feb. 20, 2017 @ 16:34 GMT
Steve, thank you for the feedback. I'm curious about the "l" in your energy equation ml2. I imagine it cannot be length (l) because the units would not align for energy. I'm curious to learn more. On a separate note, my colleagues and I also have an upcoming paper on gravity. We didn't address it in this essay for FQXi, but given your comments on quantum gravity, I would be happy to share it with you offline if you would like to exchange works and see if there is any similarity.
Steve Dufourny replied on Feb. 20, 2017 @ 21:26 GMT
You are welcome Mr Yee,
If you want,I will be happy,with pleasure,I search answers :) and I like study news ideas and works about this weakest quant force.The paradox is that this force is in the same time the strongest when we consider that this standard model is encircled by this cold gravitation if I can say.In fact I consider even that a photon is a spheron coded ,like if this thermo...
view entire post
You are welcome Mr Yee,
If you want,I will be happy,with pleasure,I search answers :) and I like study news ideas and works about this weakest quant force.The paradox is that this force is in the same time the strongest when we consider that this standard model is encircled by this cold gravitation if I can say.In fact I consider even that a photon is a spheron coded ,like if this thermo was coded by this gravity implying electromagnetic and thermodynamical properties.I search a kind of primordial serie of spherical volumes.This quantum serie in its uniqueness like a spheron is the same number than our cosmological serie ,from 1 the central singularity sothe serie is between 1 and x in logic .I have superimposed to our standard model particles encoded like photons but with l the spherons with force weaker than photons and electromagnetims.I have also inserted a seri of quantum BHs with a central sphere for the singularity,gravitational, and so these forces them are stronger than our quarks gluons nuclear forces.l is proportional witht the spherical volumes where they are produced.So we have a superimposing of gravitational aethers Inside the gravitational aether.the luminiferous aeter is Inside and is jus a photonic sphere.My second equation mlosV=constant must be improved but we have the 3 motions of 3D sphères s spinal velocity,o orbital velocity, l linear velocity,V volume and m mass.I don't know if the o and s must be considered.
l is the the linear velocity of particles of gravitation,the dark matter,cold, the spherons.l is not constant and these particles and correlated wacves are speeder than c.l is simply their linear velocity like c but at the difference that l is proportional with the supermassive BHs for exmaple in sphericzal volume.That is why l tends to infinity like this gravity and that aethjer is gravitational from the central cosm singularity,the biggest spherical volumes,the biggest BHs.So more a BH is important in volumes, speeder is the particles produced.Hope that helps :)
all the best,
view post as summary
report post as inappropriate
Steve Dufourny replied on Feb. 24, 2017 @ 14:45 GMT
sorry not biggest spherical volume with s and BHs with s for the central sphere, the cosmological singularity.I write too quickly,sorry
This center seems conneted with all quantum singularities, the main central quantm BHs.Intriguing in a whole point of vue.
report post as inappropriate
hide replies
Declan Andrew Traill wrote on Feb. 21, 2017 @ 02:14 GMT
Jeff,
This finding is very interesting and may well hold some clues to the underlying structure of the particles in terms of WSM (Wave Structure of Matter).
It would have been better, though, if you had explained how this work fits into the topic of the essay "Wandering Towards a Goal" and how goal oriented structures emerge. As I pointed out in my essay the formation of particles is the most important reason that allows goal oriented structures to emerge in the Universe, so you should discuss this too, to show how your work fits into the essay topic.
Regards,
Declan Traill
report post as inappropriate
Anonymous replied on Feb. 21, 2017 @ 06:06 GMT
Yes, fair point about the essay topic of "Wandering Towards a Goal". Since the essay is already submitted, it will be addressed here in the comments section.
We took the topic literally to establish a goal of understanding the basic particles which constitute the atoms and molecules of complex systems. Today, it seems that we've lost sight of a goal that simplifies the structure of particles. Instead, we spend billions of dollars to find new particles, and award Nobel prizes, without recognition that nature may not be as complex as we make it seem to be.
"Wandering towards a goal" takes us off the path of complexity to search for simplicity. Our analogy that we raised was the time period in the 1800s when atoms where simplified to a nuclear structure based on proton count. In our belief, we need a similar goal now to simplify particles. As the essay topic suggests, mathematical laws give rise to these intentions, and we have used simple math to take the first step that particles may indeed be simpler than current literature has us believe today.
report post as inappropriate
John-Erik Persson wrote on Feb. 22, 2017 @ 22:14 GMT
Jeff
I see that you have joined the CNPS COMMUNITY page. However, CNPS has 4 pages and COMMUNITY is not very interesting. The main page is www.naturalphilosophy.org and it has links to DATABASE and FORUM.
Regards ____________________ John-Erik
report post as inappropriate
Author Jeff Yee replied on Feb. 22, 2017 @ 22:19 GMT
John-Erik,
Thanks for the tip. I'll join the other one.
Jeff
Wilhelmus de Wilde de Wilde wrote on Feb. 24, 2017 @ 16:21 GMT
Dear Jeff Yee,
Thank you for the intelligent observations and deductions you (and the co-authors of course) made in the essay.
The perceptions you made and its conclusions are very insightfull.
In
my essay " The Purpose of Life" I am searching for the origin of our consciousness that is the cause of all our thinking about past events (facts ?).
It is of course quite a different approach as yours but I hope that you will anyhow find some time to read and or rate it.
best regards
Wilhelmus de Wilde
report post as inappropriate
Author Jeff Yee replied on Feb. 24, 2017 @ 16:29 GMT
I'd be happy to give it a read... thanks for bringing it to our attention, and appreciate the comment on ours.
Peter Leifer wrote on Feb. 27, 2017 @ 10:19 GMT
Dear Jeff, I'm sorry for the delay!
I shortly read you essay. The main question is: why one needs the linear function of the mass vs particle number? The last one looks like artificial value since as far as we know that the dynamical nature of the inertial mass is unknown. I try to find the mass of electron but the work is not finished. Are you really hope to find something in a tricky way without deep understanding?
Best regards,
Peter
report post as inappropriate
Francis Duane Moore wrote on Feb. 27, 2017 @ 15:10 GMT
Your comment about my essay Proton Three Plane Immersion Connection Theory concerning "1/4" non conservation. My email fdmooredds@cox.net
Send your gravity paper as soon as possible. Gratefully yours Francis Duane Moore
report post as inappropriate
Francis Duane Moore replied on Feb. 27, 2017 @ 15:19 GMT
Hi Jeff, Have you studied the "mass defect" in binding energy for values above Z72 Thanks Francis Duane Moore
report post as inappropriate
Author Jeff Yee replied on Mar. 2, 2017 @ 16:12 GMT
Francis, no, haven't studied it yet and am currently traveling at the moment. After I return home will try to tackle this one. Regarding the gravity paper, will send to your email now.
Karoly Kehrer wrote on Mar. 4, 2017 @ 22:43 GMT
Dear Jeff et.all
I have to say, based on our long lasting cooperation, therefore having a first hand knowledge of your discoveries yous is the best. It introduces the readers to groundbreaking and sweepings discovery. Thanks.
Respectfully Dr.Karoly Kehrer
report post as inappropriate
Don Limuti wrote on Mar. 9, 2017 @ 23:16 GMT
Hi Jeff and associates,
Your paper demonstrated how mathematical thinking has some power to it. I like your idea of making a periodic chart of particles. You point to the neutrino as being the "proton" of the periodic table of particles.
My work also points to the neutrino as being the fundamental building block of particles (and photons). Some of what I have done may give you a boost in your work. Check out my website www.digitalwavetheory.com
Congratulations on your creative push to the future!
Don Limuti
report post as inappropriate
Author Jeff Yee replied on Mar. 10, 2017 @ 00:56 GMT
Thanks Don for the comment. I was reading your web site and section on neutrinos. I see the part about the link to photons and again on gravity (http://www.digitalwavetheory.com/36_Neutrinos_and_Gravity.h
tml). Is there somewhere on the site where you can refer me to neutrinos as the building blocks of particles? I'd love to see if there is any similarity.
Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov wrote on Mar. 11, 2017 @ 11:01 GMT
Dear Jeff,
I appreciate your work, and your aspirations for the particle table are close to me.
I want to give you a link to my
essay, which deals with neutrino and the fractal structure of matter, which is confirmed experimentally. In my opinion, there are many levels of matter that differ in the constants of properties. All the elements of each level are neutrinos for the remaining levels, because they differ, first of all, by the angular momentum. By analogy of Maxwell, "the Maxwell gears are distinguished by the tooth module".
Therefore, I think that we should consider not one, but several tables of elementary particles, similar to the table of chemical elements, which differ in energy by 13.9 times.
Kind regards,
Vladimir
report post as inappropriate
Author Jeff Yee replied on Mar. 11, 2017 @ 15:57 GMT
Vladimir,
Thanks... I read through your paper and have a couple of questions. You mention that the electron is 137 quarks, which this number is related to the fine structure constant. But if it is 137 quarks, how would it explain that the electron's mass is much smaller than the proton's mass, which has 3 quarks?
Also, I was looking for more information about the energy differing by 13.9 times that you mentioned in your comment but I don't see it in the paper. Where is it?
Regards,
Jeff
Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov replied on Mar. 12, 2017 @ 11:47 GMT
Dear Jeff,
I am very glad that you interested in my work.
In the "The limiting elements of matter" section of my essay essay in the second paragraph (before the quark table) on page 7, the ratios of all the basic parameters of the limit elements are given.
Formulas for calculating the basic parameters of the limit elements (33) - (40) are placed in my first version of a...
view entire post
Dear Jeff,
I am very glad that you interested in my work.
In the "The limiting elements of matter" section of my essay
essay in the second paragraph (before the quark table) on page 7, the ratios of all the basic parameters of the limit elements are given.
Formulas for calculating the basic parameters of the limit elements (33) - (40) are placed in my first version of a large still unedited work by reference [20]
«Deterministic gravitational waves» in Section 5. «Fractal structure of the matter», на стр. 77 – 79.
Your question
«But if it is 137 quarks, how would it explain that the electron's mass is much smaller than the proton's mass, which has 3 quarks?»... I apologize for my English and for the fact that I could not explain clearly in the essay, many questions, including this one.
I did not accidentally draw attention in an essay on the effect of Josephson. In it clearly is shown that the de Broglie wave of an electron can have any energy, but it is always less than the energy of an electron. Before becoming a photon, the de Broglie wave of an electron exists as a particle, which is a pair of toroidal gravitational waves. The electron itself is the limiting particle of the electron level of matter, which can form a multitude of particles of the electronic level of matter. For example, an atom, not empty, but contains a medium of physical vacuum from a multitude of particles of the electronic level of matter, which form the spectral lines of the atom.
Similarly to an electron, at the quark level of matter there is a limiting element d-quark, whose energy is 13.9 times larger than the electron. The d-quark can form a multitude of particles in the form of its "de Broglie waves", which are now called gluons.
The electron consists of 137 quarks, which are strictly synchronized de Broglie waves of the d-quark.
The main question of the essay contest, I associate with the clarification of the cause of self-organization of matter, first into particles.
Therefore, your work at the peak of this issue is very important.
In my opinion, it is important to understand that in the fractal structure of matter, all particle formation processes are menaged by parametric resonance and solitons that form the potential wells of stability of all elements of matter.
Each fundamental particle is a high-Q resonator having a plurality of resonant frequencies. Interactions between particles are possible only at their common resonant frequencies. At resonant frequencies of parametric resonance, de Broglie waves form. The interaction between particles, atoms and bodies is realized at the resonant frequencies of their de Broglie waves (particles from micro to macro scale).
All the limiting elements of fractal matter are interconnected by common grid of resonance frequencies, which is related with the stable speed of the propagation of the interaction. Therefore, we see and explore our strictly repeating world from the same set: particles, atoms, molecules and cosmic bodies. For example, of the eight planets of the solar system, there are two, practically identical in size pairs, Venus and Earth, Uranus and Neptune. The pairs are in the same quantum states and are not accidentally neighbors.
For you, the important question is how the particles from their entire zoo are arranged.
This is a very difficult question, because most of the particles under investigation are not fundamental, but are planetary systems and can consist of a set of planetary systems of different levels of matter. The example of such particle is the neutron.
The complexity of particles is comparable to the structure of complex molecules, but particle accelerators are just a miserable similarity of instrument for studying the structure of molecules.
It's like judging the laws of formation of music during dropping of the pianos with big high. For me in the first approximation only pions and muons are understandable so far.
As for the tables, then, obviously, this is also a difficult question. For example, probably the analogue of a neutron and a proton, in the next deeper level of matter, are stable hyperons whose energy is at least 13.9 times larger than a proton and a neutron. However, it is possible that the measured hyperon energies do not correspond to their true energy and can include neutrino elements of a deeper level of matter that can reduce the interaction energy.
Particles, in the energy range from a neutron to a stable hyperon, perhaps many of them are atomic nuclei, or parts of the atomic nuclei, and therefore form some part of your table, similar to the table of chemical elements. Such atomic nuclei can be charged or neutral, without a complex planetary system of electrons, such as a neutron, which can turn into a proton and a Hydrogen atom.
The structure of the nuclei of complex atoms has recently been established. I assume that the nuclei of complex atoms from elementary particles are analogues of molecules from atoms. The simple principles for constructing the fundamental elements of matter I have proposed are only a tool for in-depth research.
Most likely, in order to investigate the fractal structure of particles, we must direct our gaze into cosmos and into the structure of molecules, and also look for analogies. Therefore, in my great work, I began to study all possible limiting elements from the macro-scale to the honeycomb structure of the universe.
Then I understood the structure of the elements of the medium of the physical vacuum with 6 observed Planck spectra of its radiation starting from 3 MHz.
I wish you every success in your interesting and necessary work.
Kind regards,
Vladimir
view post as summary
report post as inappropriate
James Lee Hoover wrote on Apr. 3, 2017 @ 17:41 GMT
Jeff and co-authors,
Such an effort is overdue. This is quite an important endeavor in organizing and ordering, contributing to better understanding and no doubt opening up avenues toward new discoveries, lie your reference to the equivalence of the proton.
Certainly discovery is part of seeking goals utilizing mathematical laws that have come before, just as this effort will spawn new laws.
I seek such a discover effort in the galactic field in terms of dark matter in my essay. Hope you get a chance to read it.
Jim Hoover
report post as inappropriate
James Lee Hoover replied on Apr. 5, 2017 @ 02:23 GMT
Jeff and co-authors,
As the contest draws to a close, I recheck those I've read to see if I've rated them. Bad accounting system and short memory. I see that I rated your important mission description on 4/3.
Hope you have enjoyed the interchange of ideas as much as I have.
Regards,
Jim Hoover
report post as inappropriate
Login or
create account to post reply or comment.