Here is where one of my
papers used to live on the BNL RHIC page, it was published from
Nov.2004-Nov.2007. This in no way validates my work... however, it
was considered worthy of posting and raises some very interesting
possibilities. Thanks again Yuji. Some of the equations within
the work below, will jump out at the reader, and become easily
understandable, while others may be lengthy and difficult to
comprehend. There is, however, something for everyone within these
works. So please enjoy what you may.
http://www.pumpraser.com/rhicspin.mcmillan
ON THE ELECTRONIC
COMPOSITION OF MATTER AND ENERGY plus EXTRAS with
RELATIVITY FOR THE SPEED OF
LIGHT MEASUREMENT AND EARTH ORBITAL VELOCITY plus
ON THE NATURE OF GRAVITY
plus a brief and final section on
COMPUTER ENCRYPTION USING
THE SUPER ALGORITHM (Carnivore) plus
THE SQUARE ROOT of 2
(pro-engineered)
by Brian S.
McMillan
OPTICAL
ENTROPY
Before I begin, I have added
this at the beginning for astronomers and particle theorists alike. I felt
that this would be useful as a point of reference for the optical theory of
light propagation, since light is currently thought of as an entity without
mass. In reality, light is composed of alternating positive and negative
electron strings or filaments, representing the magnetic component... with a
gyroscopic positive and negative electron leader at it's tip, and ideally
rotating in a ninety degree plane around the leading tip of the former,
representing the electronic or optical component, for a total of zero
charge. This would work something like a fly casting reel. When
light is emitted from a stellar source or galaxy, a phenomenon known as
gravitational lensing may occur... when it does, as the optical component passes
through the electromagnetic fields near the stellar body or galaxy, the string
or magnetic field component in the light photons wake will be made to bend
around the magnetic fields of the lensing bodies and gravitational lensing will
occur. Since the filament of positive and negative electron string,
representing the magnetic field component of light, is interacting with the
magnetic fields of these stellar objects, the accompanying deflection of light
must be the result of entropy. There must be a frictional point of contact
with a material feature of the lensing objects, lest the deflection would be
made to occur without physical cause. Since the propagation velocity of
light itself remains constant throughout its journey across space, the leading
photon or optical component of light is able to maintain this velocity because
the filament or string of positive and negative electrons is connecting it with
the atom of emission, and the emitting atom is actually pumping these electron
filaments out at the speed of light. This is why light is able to maintain
the appearance of a mass-less entity, seemingly without any loss of energy as it
travels across the material littered vacuum of space. You don't get
something from nothing.
Furthermore, since the atom
which is emitting this light is only acting as a conduit for the electrons which
are entering the shell of emission, there must be some local source for the
electrons which are undergoing (electronic pressure) to conduct out of the atom
and along the optical axis of transmission. Near the surface of stars,
obviously, it is predominately the hydrogen atom and some helium atoms which
make up this source. When a filament in a flashlight bulb is made to emit
light, then it is the (juice) from the battery, i.e. chemical source, which is
responsible. Since there are only 92380 electron-positron units in the
shell of hydrogen, any stimulated (optical) emissions involving hydrogen other
than a steady source of electrons (if this can happen in the first place) will
result in 92380 * 2.81794092 /10^15 meters * 2^(1/2) = 3.681500293
/10^10 meters light travel distance away from the hydrogen nucleus... which is
only about 3.5 times the diameter of hydrogen itself. Need I say, that's
not very far! However, in the case of stellar emissions, it is a specific
shell of positive and negative electron composed string which is experiencing
this channel of electron flow, as the atom of emission exists as an occupant
which is under pressure, within the plasma before being ripped apart and giving
up it's strands of electricity to be immediately replaced by it's cloned
neighbor as the process continues to the stable exhaustion of the hydrogen and
helium fuel. Stars are able to store this very great amount of hydrogen
within their interior, because just a few hundred thousand kilometers below the
solar surface, the hydrogen is actually frozen until liberated by the action of
the filaments of magnetic lines moving to and from the interior. It is,
therefore, ironic that the hottest places in the universe are also the
coldest. While this represents only part of the process, it plays an
integral role in the thermonuclear engine of our
star.
ON THE NATURE OF
GRAVITY
by Brian S.
McMillan
http://www.godkings.com/gravity.txt
GRAVITY I and GRAVITY
II (overview)
Briefly: Gravity is
currently viewed as a single-fundamental force... a force of attraction.
In reality, gravity is NOT a force, nor is it attractive. Gravity is an
effect... that is, it is the result of something else, or rather a symptom of
kinetic energy. I say this because gravity has two faces; Gravity I,
inertia... and Gravity II, electromagnetism. Both of which involve the
only true fundamental force... that of kinetic energy, the force shared between
two or more massive objects as they fragment or collide. Gravity I, or
inertia, involves the resulting momentum imparted to an object when another
object strikes it directly and changes it's inertial moment, or when it is
connected by a quasi-rigid tether or even affected by a molecular atmosphere, in
such a way as to become a member of a compounded inertial reference frame no
longer entirely it's own. Gravity II is common magnetism... it is a
helical or linear construct, which is composed of alternating positive and
negative electrons, forming a STRING or field, around or connecting bodies on a
celestial scale, and acting as a quasi-rigid tether between those bodies, and
sometimes trapping an object within another's inertial reference frame or even
resulting in a period of revolution. I make the celestial distinction,
because, when we observe magnetic fields on a scale which is smaller than the
human body, we usually just recognize them as simply magnetic in nature, and are
not accustomed to calling them gravity. When we observe the atom in any
way, we are actually observing the interacting constructs of electromagnetic
fields (which are composed of electrons themselves), whether we are indirectly
observing the properties of the nucleus or directly observing a macroscopic
collection of atoms as molecules. I say this, not so much because we can't
actually see the surface of anything. Since, when we are looking at
something with our eyes, our brains are actually translating the
electro-chemical impulses that the cones and rods in our eyes are collecting as
light. Which in turn is the light that is reflected off the surface of
those objects, and never visible (even with our eyes) as the actual surface at
all. But rather, I am saying this because, everything is electrons, and I
do mean everything... everything but neutrinos of course. The later of
which, two compose every electron.
Oh yea, one last
thing. Since magnetic fields are composed of positive and negative
electrons, and these strings are the most efficient conductor in the universe,
the earths geomagnetic fields, besides acting as the primary source of friction
heating the core of the earth, where their loci are the most dense, are also
taking heat away from the poles and conducting it back to the sun, since these
filaments of Gravity II are actually holding all of the planets to the
sun. This is why the poles of the earth are frozen. Without the
presence of the earths geomagnetic field, all life would perish, since it is the
induced resonance by these fields which allows the organic chemical mitosis in
cells to be timed in the gestation process. If one were to observe the
auroral ovals above the poles of the earth through time lapse photography, every
once and a while when the solar wind is at a maximum and the moon of our earth
is at a right angle to the direction of the sun, instead of the usual two bright
spots at high noon and midnight (representing the insertion points-if above the
North Pole-for the Gravity II magnetic pulley belts connecting the earth to the
sun) a glimpse of two more slightly dimmer spots, forming the limn of the cross
hairs, reveals the connection to our moon. That the moon plays a major
role in the reproductive cycle of mammals on this planet is revealed in this
image sequence of the auroral ovals. The geomagnetic field of our earth
not only regulates the reproductive cycle but continues to affect the formation
of blood cells in the marrow of our bones until the day that we die. This
is why our blood is iron rich, because it is responsive to this field through
the ferromagnetic property of our blood. The onion skin like layers of
these geomagnetic lines of flux, not only have a distance of separation between
them, which varies over the altitude above and below sea level, where the
domains get progressively farther apart the higher one climbs, but the magnetic
filaments also possess a motion from the South Pole to the North Pole of the
earths exterior which also varies according to domain. Through the use of
a simple compass, one may easily see this process in action, as the magnetized
tip of the compass needle, which also has a little invisible magnetic field in
the shape of a helical coil and acting like a little sail in the magnetic wind,
begins to orient itself to the direction of the movement of the earths
geomagnetic field, like the tail of a fish swimming up stream against the
current of water, acting as a rudder and pointing in the direction of the flow
of the magnetic field.
When NASA astronauts are in
orbit above Earth, or on the way to the moon, being outside of the
characteristic geomagnetic domain in which the human body developed, a
disruption of cellular production and development is the result.
Everything in the human body begins to change in response to the lack of both
inertia (Gravity I) and magnetism (Gravity II) with the most noticeable long
term effects being disorientation as well as muscular atrophy from the former
and blood cell and immune system retardation in the later case. While
compensation for muscular atrophy may offer a straightforward, all be it, short
term solution through isometric exercise... anything short of a synthetic but
fully functional replacement for the geomagnetic field would be like offering a
bacterium as a stand-in for the canary in a coal mine. Space sickness
would eventually set in, dementia and leukemia like symptoms as a consequence,
eventually resulting in war, disease, and then,
death.
I will elaborate at some
point in the future, on my web site, as to the effects on bacterium as well as
cell growth in the human and animal kingdom, that result from minor changes in
the earths geomagnetic field. For now, it is safe to say that the
evolution of body mass in all organic creatures, as well as the coat patterns in
animals are directly affected by fluctuations in the velocity and density of the
planetary geomagnetic field. The movement of these planetary fields is
directly connected to the rotation as well as the orbital motion of the planets
about the sun. In fact, the very same electrons which are strung together
as fields that go through our bodies, and which you may observe through the
action of the compass needle are, and have been (like pulley belts), passing
around the core of the sun before they go out, and into the earth, around and
around and do it all over again. We are touching the stuff made of stars
every moment of every day. Also, see:
COHERENT RASER PRODUCTION
and EXPLOITATION,
The Standing Radio Effect by
Brian S. McMillan
http://www.godkings.com/raser.txt
SPLITTING THE
SPECTRUM
The splitting of the
spectrum is a phenomena in which the angle of incidence for the two electron
composed photon at the leading head of the magnetic filament, which, is also
composed of a string of alternating positive and negative electrons, is also
subject to optical entropy. Even though transmitted light travels through
different materials at a slightly reduced rate of speed, than through a vacuum,
the velocity remains constant and therefore does not diminish over time.
This is also due to the same property afore mentioned. Because the optical
component of the positive-negative electron composed photon is rotating at a
rate which is consistent with the rotation rate for the component parts of the
electronic filament connecting it with the emitting atom, then the wavelength
and therefore the frequency of the optical component will maintain this attitude
on its passage through the prism. One would be inclined to believe that
the faster rotation rate of the shorter blue wavelength light (like a gyroscope)
would have a tendency to keep it on a less deviant path through the prism.
But since the hard component electrons of the blue light are rotating at a
faster rate, then the angle of incidence is met at the index of refraction with
a greater increase of friction of the component electronic parts making up this
rotating photon, resulting in a greater deflection, which reduces the
transmission velocity the of blue light in the material to a slightly lesser
amount than the red light which is rotating at a slower rate, thus subjecting
the red light to less friction upon entry at the index or inter-cease of the
atoms making up the prism, and is therefore more penetrating. While the
later description has been directly observed, it was not previously known to
result from this descriptive detail of the physical mechanism. This is
also precisely how the Faraday Effect is induced in transmitted light.
Because the applied magnetic fields to the glass plates are actually
manipulating the degrees of freedom of the leading photon through its
inhibition, rotation of the polarization of the light photon is made to
occur.
Brian S. McMillan Copyright
1992
An Introductory note:
When one considers that the relationship between the material charge of the
electron and that of the Fundamental Constants of Physics in SI, is solidly
grounded in geometry, then and only then, may a true understanding of physical
science be obtained. These constants have been instrumental in my
theoretical work, and quite frankly, I could never have achieved anything at all
without personal access to this physical data, along with the mathematics
established by countless persons which have come before me. The constants
associated with the physical objects are exploited through the descriptions of
the values within the format of the notations along with the behavioral
characteristics of those objects. Every object in the theory has is
counterpart in reality. It may seem odd to some traditional physicists and
adherents to mathematics, that I have listed some of my results as devoid of
their units and magnitudes. However, I assure you, that the true
usefulness of these notations, lies not in the significant agreement with the SI
values alone, but within the brevity of their geometric associations combined
with the simplicity of their form. With that said... a simple
understanding of the most rudimentary laws of motion, and groupings of geometric
objects, is truly all that you need to understand the entire universe.
After all, we live in it...
NUCLEAR
THEORY
Proton Radius, Spin,
Configuration and Resonance with Reference to Johannes Kepler and Ernest
Rutherford + EPR and Quantum Correlation Through Hidden Variables-The
Photo Electric Effect + The Mass of the Electron Type Neutrino + The Nuclear
Magnetic Anomaly + Review of the Two Stage Holographic Microscope Image by L.S.
Bartell, along with Review of the Positron Discovery by Carl D.
Anderson
by Brian S.
McMillan
let us suppose that the
configuration of the proton of the nucleon class, while residing within the
hydrogen atom is different than while within heavier atoms. That is,
it is less restrained. If we assume that the proton is a looped
string of 18381 electron-positron units of alternating charges, with one
outstanding positron, for a charge of +1... and that during a totally polarized
state, that this hoola-hoop of charges is perpendicular to that of the
hoola-hoop shell of 92380 electron-positron units. That is the proton
looks like a spinning loop on a table or like a penny that is set on edge in
rotation upon a surface. With the hydrogen shell loop of 92380
electron-positron charges perpendicular to that of the proton loop, and the said
92380 unit shell loop spinning like a hoola-hoop on the ecliptic... like the
ring of Saturn. This results in an oscillating torus for the configuration
of hydrogen... if we consider the dimensions of these components as moving
through space, which they are. It may also be worthy to note at this
point, that I have found a very functional model for the electron or positron as
a composition of two counter rotating neutrinos, looking like a cross-bar tire
iron with the weld missing in the center. And because the neutrino changes
it's shape, these two-neutrino composed electrons more closely resemble two
cue-tips with the bulk of their material thrown to the tips of their crossing
masses. Now, these gear like structures may only mesh according to
mechanical laws. That is, their chiral geometry, just like gears, must be
consistent with their interaction. So in order for the electron-positron
string to exist as a chorus of an odd number of units, the string must make a
half twist in its configuration, so that the two ends mesh with a smooth
rotation.
Since the nucleon class of
particles do not function within the nucleus of atoms as completely independent
entities, their interaction at times, may, in fact result in a sharing or even
exchanging of electronic charges, which in turn is the consequence of their
oscillations or vibrational modes. It may even be that the proton will
gain an electron to become a light neutron while confined at a specific nuclear
pressure and energy state, in order that momentum be conserved as the result of
this oscillation within the nucleus. This will of course result in the
other neutron losing that same electron to become a heavy proton for a given
harmonic mode, and will then continue through to the end of the
oscillation. The pi-meson or Pion group would be an excellent candidate
for this type of process. Where an electron-positron pair may be involved,
along with the decay of a muon, for the charged variety, or two photons for the
neutral pion. If this is true, then this would establish the Yukawa
Potential as an interaction which is firmly grounded in electro-magnetics, thus
confirming the nature of the strong force as electronic in origin and also
illustrating that the pion's property of iso-spin belongs to paired clusters of
electrons and positrons. The true stability of the proton may in fact,
ultimately, be attributable to a combination of two main factors; the charge
coupling twist plus the number of electron-positron units which form it's
structure. I say this because, when the dual-neutrino electron-positron
units form filaments or strings, then the radial tension produced by the
component parts when they combine or grab one another at their tips, may be
allowed, only under certain dimensional constraints. That is to say that
the proton and neutron may each have only a certain number of allowed curls to
their strands when their loops possess a limited number of units which in turn
compose their circumference. This is because, ultimately these particles
are all geometric in origin, and when the interaction between the component
parts reach a certain limit of stress due to their relative coupling angle, then
these electronic objects will have reached their limit of stability and in turn
they will breakdown by flying apart and decaying into other objects of lesser
mass... this is also called nuclear or beta emissions. When this type of
exchange is prohibited, a polarized state may be the intervening factor, which
in turn will result in the greater stability of the proton. These types of
emissions could also be made to occur through a limitation of space or simple
confinement within the nucleus of various atoms. Then again, however
likely, this is only speculation... but remember all material objects are
geometric in nature, there are no unseen rules and there is no magic
involved.
Now these electron-positron
loops are almost always touching one another at a single point of friction...
that is the nuclear loop and the shell loop. They spin and they
rotate as the profiles of the strings step-interlock like gears. When
the proton is not polarized with respect to the shell of hydrogen, it is more
like the Mayan Calendar, with a small wheel set against a larger wheel in the
same plane. The later, naturally would leave open the possible
interaction or exchange of more electrons and positrons in the loops and
becoming less stable as independent bodies, they will in turn, increase the
resonant stability of the hydrogen atom as a whole. When the hydrogen atom
absorbs light or energy. Depending on the frequency of light it
absorbs and of course the type of energy, which might not be light at
all. The cross section of the hydrogen nucleus may be the primary
target of this absorption and a resonance will be made to occur. This
resonance looks like a ring which has been deformed into an ellipse. Since
the circumference of the proton loop is spinning with orbital loop contact, then
this deformation will also be transferred to the shell of the hydrogen
atom. As the nuclear harmonic ellipse of the proton undulates or
oscillates into an ellipse of opposite length and height, it will begin to
rotate in an independent plane, as the loop of the shell is also doing the
same. The nuclear object loops then begin to literally jump across the
inside diameter of the shell as it rotates, and for a fleeting moment, the
nucleus and the shell are not touching one another... as they do the harmonic
timing dance or oscillation known as the dipole vibrational
mode.
I have included the Argonne
National Laboratory
Theory Group web page as a
click-on because of
the similarity in the scale
and shape of their Deuteron
in lead, as to my dipole
oscillation in hydrogen.
http://www.phy.anl.gov/theory/index.html
This first section has
become a kind of synopsis
of the notations which
follow and only represents
a small fraction of the
material. However, I know
that this will be useful as
a starting point.
________________________________________
Wherever I have used the
number 3 within these notations, so as to bring agreement with the values for
SI; it has always (and I do mean always) been through multiples or
fractions of 3 and-or incorporating multiples of 2 in the same fashion... such
as: 1/3, 2/3, 3/3, 4/3... 27/3 and so forth. Likewise for the number 2, it
has always been through fractions or multiples, such as: 1/2, 2/2, 3/2, 4/2,
6/2... 8/2 and so on. Naturally, I also utilize (pi) within my notations,
since this is a geometric theory of matter. All of this must obviously
pertain to a volume based standard of geometric proportion for the atomic
composition and nuclear arrangement, and of course there is no revelation here,
because we see these same values used within the equations for The Fundamental
Physical Constants in SI and non-SI based units (permeability, permittivity,
Thomson cross section, quantum numbers... etc.), as well as for the great
classic solutions involving ordinary geometry, which is the standard for
Gaussian based notation.
Because of the geometric
nature of matter, wherever you see a simple root or raised exponent which
involves the square or cube, then this will denote a relationship involving area
or volume respectively. Furthermore, whenever I utilize exponents which
are squares or cubes combined with roots, then these will signify a transition
mode of resonance or periodicity within a given area or volume. Wherever,
you see that there is agreement for the yields to within at least six
significant figures, and this agreement has resulted from the application of a
resonance on the one hand, V.S. a simple exponent on the other, resulting in the
constants being formulated along rudimentary yet entirely different lines...
then this will constitute proof. That I have attempted to utilize these
notational forms within strict guidelines for their geometric and dynamic
yields, is no guarantee that I have not gone too far, or that I have not
overlooked something. For there are many mathematical expressions that may
be explored by the reader which I have not covered here or that may be more
valid than the ones that I have presented. Certainly, there are many more
valid arguments yet to be discovered. My use of the Lorentz transformation
within these notations is both simple and complex, and I have not used it
arbitrarily. It may also be mentioned here, that wherever I explore the
use of the differential for the electron wavelength and its radius within the
same transformation, that I am really only experimenting with atomic or nuclear
compression and emissions standards, which, as I have already stated, may become
too repetitive or exhaustive for the average reader. Also, please realize,
that these equations are not notational tricks of manipulation, and that (for
the most part), they represent a direct relevance to the matters which are
presented here. Thank you.
________________________________________
Note 1: Everywhere the
units for the proton are given as 18382, is an (even) value which denotes a
relationship of (area) or compounded dimension. Everywhere the units for
the proton are given as 18381, is an (odd) value which denotes a relationship
involving (charge) or compounded mass. The same rule applies when using
the 92380 v.s. 92381 electronic mass unit count for the shell of the hydrogen
atom. Everywhere, there is some combination of the two, then the
respective contributors are to be perceived as a
bridge.
If the electron radius is
determined as a dimension, which is directly related to the scope of it's
charge, through a material extension. And we can easily see, that the free
mass of this electron, is also included in this determination. Then one
may further propose, that the radius of the electron is a structure which
represents an extension of it's mass; in order that the electron may bind with
another electron of equal mass, but with an opposite charge. In fact, this
charge may only be determined in relation to two or more electrons... never
one. A simple proposal for the interaction of this configuration as the
square root of (the electron circumference times two free masses divided by
permeability), may be illustrated thus:
IF:
(2pi * 2.81794092 /10^15 * 2 * 9.109388427 /10^31 /4pi *
10^7)^(1/2)
= 1.602177219 /10^19 C
Coulomb
THEN:
(2pi r'e * 2 m'e /u0)^(1/2) = e
Coulomb
Four electron-positron units
look something like this (but with bulbous tips and thin centers, below) when
they are arranged in a straight line, except that the radii of their tips are
touching one another... only on one neutrino arm each, while the diameter of
their other neutrino arm is 90 degrees out of phase with the adjacent
electron. As their crossing arms continue to rotate, every other arm
begins to unhinge, while the out of phase arm then begins to make a connection
at the precise moment that the others break free. For a radius of
2.81794092 /10^15 meter... then the hypotenuse of the right triangle which
is mapped out by the arms, must be equal to approximately the square root of two
times the radius or:
OR:
2^(1/2) * 2.81794092 /10^15 meter
= 3.985170267 /10^15 meter permeable
distance
________________________________________
XXXX
________________________________________
When this measurement is
arranged, so that the distance between the centers of the objects is precisely
equal to that of the hypotenuse, then one may determine the circumference for
the proton based on the number of electron-positron units which make up it's
mass. The rest of the measurement, that for the radius of the proton, may
now easily be determined by dividing the circumference by
2pi.
THEN:
18382 * 2^(1/2) * 2.81794092/10^15 meter/ 2pi
= 1.165895899/ 10^11 meter radius
proton
OR:
(1838.2 * 2.4263)^(1/3) * 2/3
= 1.097373565 Rydberg constant
(abstract)
1986 CODATA
1.0973731534(13)
IF:
(18382 + 92380) * 1.511091462 /10^32 * 6.02213713 *
10^23
= .0010079342 molar mass hydrogen
AND:
(18381 + 92380) * 1.511091462 /10^32 * 6.02213713 *
10^23
= .0010079251 molar mass hydrogen
SO:
10079342 /91 - 92380
= 18382 units electron (dimensional proton
count)
AND:
10079251 /91 - 92380
= 18381 units electron (charged proton
count)
AND:
18381 * 1.511091462 /10^32 * 6.02213713 *
10^0
= 1.672671 /10^27 kg free mass
proton
SO:
92380 * 2/3 /(1- 2.4263034832/ 2.81794092)^(1/2) /
2.99792458^2
/10^0
= 18381 units electron (charged proton
count)
HENCE:
10^16 * 2/3 * 92380 /18381
/(1-2.4263034832 /2.81794092)^(1/2)
= 2.99792458^2 10^16 m^2 s^-2
c^2
AND:
(10^-8 meter * 10973735.654 * 3/2)^3 * 92380
/18382
= .0224141594 meter^3 /mol molar
volume
THEN:
10^5 Pa * 10^19 *
(1- 2.4263096516
/2.81794092)(1- 2.99792458^2 /16.02177219) *
pi^2
= 6.02213713 10^23 NA Number
Avogadro
HENCE:
10^-15 m^-1 * 1/2 * pi * 92380 *
(1- 2.4263096516
/2.81794092)(1- 2.99792458^2 /16.02177219)
= 8.854187818 10^-12 F m^-1 permittivity of
vacuum
IF:
(18382 + 92381) * 1.511091462 /10^32 kg * 6.02213713 *
10^23
= .0010079433 H+ molar mass
hydrogen
THEN:
(((18382+92381)
/16.02177219)^(1/2) /1.3806581793 /(1- 2.4263096516 /2.81794092))^(1/2)
*
2 *
2.99792458^2
= 3.741765946 c1 first radiation constant
(abstract)
(fabricated molar standard) first
variation
(((18382+92381)
/16.02177219)^(1/2) /1.3806581793 /(1- 2.4263105800 /2.81794092))^(1/2)
*
2 *
2.99792458^2
= 3.741770381 c1 first radiation constant
(abstract)
(fabricated molar standard) second
variation
1986 CODATA
3.7417749(22)
AND:
2.99792458^2 * 10^16 * pi^2 /2^(1/2) /3^2 /10^15 meter
/
((1- 2.426308695
/2.81794092)(1+ 2.426308695
/2.81794092))^(1/2)
= 137.0359895 a^-1 inverse fine-structure
constant
1986 CODATA
137.0359895(61)
HENCE:
4pi /10^7 * 6.02213713 * 10^0 /92380 / 6pi /
(1- 2.4263034832/
2.81794092)^(1/2)
= 1.165749575/ 10^11 meter radius
proton
SO:
92380 * 2/3 /(1- 2.4263034832/ 2.81794092)^(1/2) /
2.99792458^2
/10^0
= 18381 units electron (charged proton
count)
FINALLY: 92380 * 2/3
/(1- 2.4263/ 2.817936874)^(1/2) /
2.99792458^2
/10^0
= 18381 units electron (charged proton
count)
We observe, that when the
wavelength for the electron is reduced, then the electrons radius is also
reduced. Since the measured radius for the electron does not actually
change to the degree which is represented here, it must be that the permeable
binding distance along the neutrino arms is what is actually changing. For
this equation to be represented in the first place, where the dimensional
constants may easily be inserted into the Lorentz-transform while maintaining
good agreement with their actual measured values (second to last, above), then
it is also assumed that the wavelength of the electron is directly proportionate
to its radius and the speed of light. And, as we can easily see... this is
true.
Whereby, the structure of
the electron is something other than round. For if it were round, then
there would be no geometry to act as a mechanism for binding, that would be
simple enough to accommodate the observed characteristics of charge as well as
configuration for a two body system. Not to mention that of the hierarchy
of mass... such as the charge-neutral characteristic of the neutrino along with
its very small mass and great penetrability... two of which compose every
electron or positron. I have found that in nature, there is a place for
everything, and everything has it's place.
IF:
(18382 + 92380) * 1.511091462 /10^32 * 6.02213713 *
10^23
= .0010079342 molar mass hydrogen
AND:
(5.29180471704 /10^11)^3 /9.80665
= 1.511091462 /10^32 kg emu-electronic mass
unit
WHERE:
5.29177249(24) /10^11 meter Bohr radius 1986
CODATA
THEN:
1/2 /2^(1/2) /10^8 /(5.29180471704 /10^11 - 5.2917724989
/10^11)
= 10973736.86 m^-1 Rydberg
constant
OR:
(1838.2 * 2.4263)^(1/3) * 2/3
=
1.097373565
Rydberg constant (abstract)
IF:
(1/2 /2^(1/2) /10^16 * 3/2
/(5.29180471704 /10^11 - 5.2917724989
/10^11))^3
= .004460026135 constant of
nuclear volume
THEN:
(1/2 /2^(1/2) /10^16 * 3/2
/(5.29180471704 /10^11 - 5.2917724989 /10^11))^3 /
18382 /10^5
Pa
= 2.426300802 /10^12 meter electron
wavelength
HENCE: 2.99792458^3 *
2 * (18381 + 92380) /18380 /
(5.29180471704 /10^11 -
5.2917724989 /10^11)
= 1.007936102 molar mass hydrogen
(abstract)
AND:
((18382 + 92380) /18382
/92380 * 1.235595178 * 10^20 * 10^5 Pa /pi^2)^(1/2)
*
180pi
/10^7
= .5109996965 MeV free mass
electron
1986 CODATA
.51099906(15)
WHERE:
1838.282000(37) electron mag. moment 1986
CODATA
SO:
(1838.282 * 2.4263
/10^12)^(1/3) * 4/3 * 2^(1/2) * 2.99792458 * 10^8 *
1.660540068 /10^27 /92380
/5
= 1.672622944 /10^27 kg free mass
proton
FINALLY:
(1838.282 * 2.4263
/10^12)^(1/3) * 4/3 * 2^(1/2) * 2.99792458 * 10^8 *
1.660540068 /10^27 /92380 /5
/9.109388428 * 10^31
= 1836.152841 proton-electron mass
ratio
1986 CODATA
1836.152701(37)
IF:
10^5 * 4pi /92380
= 13.60291255 eV binding energy
hydrogen
1986 CODATA
13.6056981(40)
THEN:
(13.605697928 -
13.6029125497)^(2/3) /1.602187159 * 10^19 *
10^3
= 1.235595198 * 10^20 meter
frequency
SO:
(13.6056985015 -
13.60291254901)^(1/2) /1.097373565 /3^2 *
2.99792458
= 16.02177219 e (abstract)
THEN:
((13.6056984257-13.60291255)
* 1.097373565 * 4 * 3^4 /2.99792458 *
6.02231713)^(1/2)
= 1.410573071 u'P
(abstract)
What we find in the
equations immediately
above, is the domain for the
first emissions
line of hydrogen. This
is precisely where the
frequency, and wavelength,
for the positive
and negative electron
composed hoola-hoop,
or string, which represents
the period of
resonance of the proton as
it dimensionally
resides within the shell of
the hydrogen atom.
This is the internuclear
axis, or place of
demarcation for the ground
state of hydrogen.
Where agreement is achieved
with all three
hydrogen values, to within
at least 7 significant
figures. While this
result is not unpredictable,
it is, oddly
exact.
________________________________________
The radius of the proton
according to my theoretical
model would be something in
the range of 1.165 *
10^-11
meter. This is how I reckoned
it.
IF:
18382 * 2^(1/2) * 2.81794092/10^15 meter/ 2pi
= 1.165895899/ 10^11 meter radius
proton
And according to Johannes
Kepler's equation for the
period of rotation, equal to
r^(3/2)
THEN:
(18382 * 2^(1/2) * 2.81794092/10^15 meter/
2pi)^(3/2)
= 3.980976943/ 10^17 meter
sec. resonance
HENCE: (2 *
18381/ 92380 / 10^16
meters)^(2/3)
= 1.16559439/ 10^11 meter radius
proton
OR:
2 * 18381/ 92380 / 10^16 meters
= 3.979432778/ 10^17 meter
sec. resonance
AND:
4/3 /2.99792458^2 /10^16 meters /
(1- 2.4263034832
/2.81794092)^(1/2)
= 3.979432778/ 10^17 meter sec.
resonance
THEN:
2^(1/2) /10^10 meter * (10^11 /
1.165887704)^(3/4)
= .0224141594 molar volume
1986 CODATA
.02241410(19)
SO:
10^5 Pa * 2.4263 /10^12 meter * 92380
= .0224141594 molar volume
HENCE:
2^(1/2) /10^10 meter /
(2.81794092 /10^15 * 2^(1/2)
* 18382 /2pi)^(3/4)
= .02241404124 molar volume
OR:
(2^(1/2)/10^10 meter/ .02241404124)^(4/3) * 2pi /
2^(1/2)
/18382
= 2.81794092/10^15 meter re radius
electron
HENCE:
92380 * 2/3 /(1- 2.4263034832/ 2.81794092)^(1/2) /
2.99792458^2
/10^0
= 18381 units electron (charged proton
count)
IF:
18381 * 1.511091462 /10^32 * 6.02213713 *
10^0
= 1.672671 /10^27 kg free mass
proton
AND:
(18381 + 92380) * 1.511091462 /10^32 kg
= 1.673700014 /10^27 kg mass
Hydrogen
THEN:
(10^23 * 1.673700014 /10^27 kg * 9.80665 * 2/3)^2 *
2 * 92380
/pi^2
= .02241415035 molar volume
SO:
2 * 92380 * 2.99792458^2
= 1.660540068 amu (abstract)
1986 CODATA
1.6605402(10)
THEN:
(1- 2.4263034832/ 2.81794092)^(1/2) * 18381 * 3 *
2.99792458^4
= 1.660540068 amu (abstract)
(Lorentz-transform)
OR:
(1- 2.4263034832/ 2.81794092)^(1/2) * 18381 * 3/2 *
2.99792458^2 *
10^0
= 92380 hydrogen shell electron count
(Lorentz)
FINALLY: (2 * 92380 *
2.99792458^2)^-1
= 6.02213713 Avogadro constant
(abstract)
1986 CODATA
6.0221367(36)
HENCE: (1-
2.99792458^2 /16.02187159)^(1/2)
= 6.626045674 h Planck-Lorentz
(abstract)
THEN:
6.626045764 /10^34 /2.99792458 /10^8 /9.109388616 *
10^31
= 2.4263 /10^12 meter DeBroglie wave
electron
OR:
(1- 92380^2 /18381^2 * 4/ 9 /2.99792458^4) * 10^3 *
2.81794092
/10^15
= 2.426303483 /10^12 meter lambda
electron
IF:
2^(1/2) /10^20 /pi / (18382
* 2.81794092 /10^15 * 2^(1/2) /2pi *
1.602187159 /10^19 /4 *
10^34)^(3/2)
= 1.410573043 /10^26 J T^-1
THEN:
(1838.1/ 92380)^(1/2)
= 1.410573071 shielded proton
(abstract)
1986 CODATA
1.41057138(47)
SO:
(1/2 *10^-5 Pa * 18381/ 92380^2/ 6.02213713/
10^23/ 2.99792458^2/
10^16)^(1/2)
= 1.410573071 /10^26 J T^-1 U'p
exact
HENCE: (2/3 /
2.99792458^2 /10^16 /10^5 Pa)^(1/2) /10^15 meter /
(1- 2.4263034832/
2.81794092)^(1/4)
= 1.410573071 /10^26 J T^-1 U'p (Lorentz
transform)
OR:
10^5 Pa * (2^(1/2) * 1.410573071 /10^26 * 10^15
meter)^2
= 3.979432777 /10^17 meter sec. resonance
proton
ALSO:
(2 * (92380-18382) /10^16)^(3/2) *
2.99792458^4 * 10^32 /3^2
/10^11 meter
= .5109933739 MeV energy
electron
THEN:
10^10 meter * 2^(1/2) * 4.548394458 /10^32 kg /
(2^(1/2) * 2.81794092 /10^15
meter * 18381 /2pi /10^7)^(3/2)
= .5109976435 MeV energy
electron
SO:
((18381+92380) /18382 /92380
* 1.235595178 * 10^20 * 10^5 Pa /pi^2)^(1/2) *
180pi
/10^7
= .5109973897 MeV energy
electron
OR:
(92380 /1838.2)^(1/4) /3^2 *
(2^(1/2) * pi /(1-
2.4263043139/ 2.81794092))^(1/2)
= 1.672671 free mass proton
(abstract)
FINALLY:
(92380 /1838.1)^(1/4) /3^2 *
(2^(1/2) * pi /(1-
2.4262936607/ 2.81794092))^(1/2)
= 1.672671 free mass proton
(abstract)
So it would appear that when
measuring the deflection of
alpha particles in the
nuclei of gold
atoms... he was actually measuring
the radius of the
electron-positron units that were
quasi-rigidly fixed as
looped-strings within the
nucleus of those
atoms. WOW! WOW!
WOW!
SO:
(2.241412255 *
6.02213713)^(1/2) * 2 * 3^3 * 1.511091462
= 2.99792458 c (abstract)
FINALLY: (207.0
/18382)^(1/3) /10
= .02241433514
(mu'e/mp'e)^(1/3)
AGAIN:
(10^5 * 2.4263 /10^12 * 92380)^3 * 18381 *
1.511091462 /10^32 *
6.02213713 * 10^23 /10^19
= 1.883553220 /10^28 kg free mass
muon
AGAIN:
(10^5 Pa * 2.42631058 /10^12 meter * 92380)^3 *
1.672629876 /10^27 kg *
10^11 meter /4pi * 4pi /10^7
= 1.883531551 /10^28 kg free mass
muon
1986 CODATA
1.883532711
HENCE: ((1-
2.42631/ 2.81794092)^(1/2) * 2.99792458^3 /
9pi * 2^(1/2) * 10)^(3/2) *
18380 * 91
= 1.883531133 free mass muon
(abstract)
IF:
(18381 + 92380) *
1.511091462 /10^32 kg * 6.02213713 * 10^23
= .001007925100 molar mass
hydrogen
AND:
(10^5 * 2.4263 /10^12 * pi^2 /2)^(1/2) * 3/2 /
9.80665 * 6.02213713 *
10^0
= .001007925303 molar mass
hydrogen
THEN:
(10^5 * 2.4263 /10^12 * pi^2 /2)^(1/2) * 3/2 /
1.511091462 * 10^32 /
(18381+92380) /10^23
= 9.806651979 m s^-2 gn acceleration
gravity
FINALLY:
(10^-5 Pa * 2.81794092
/10^15 * 92380 * 2.99792458 * 10^8)^3 /
2.4263 * 10^12 meter
/3^2
= 2.176730315 /10^8 kg Planck
mass
1986 CODATA
2.17671(14)
IF:
((1.511091462/ 6.02213713)(92380 - 18380))^(1/2)
/pi^2
= 1.380658179 Boltzman constant
(abstract)
1986 CODATA
1.380658(12)
AND:
((18381 + 92380) /16.02187159)^(1/2)
/6.02213713
= 1.380658179 Boltzman constant
(abstract)
OR:
(8.987742409069 - 2.99792458^2)^(1/2)
= 1.38065818 Boltzman constant
(abstract)
THEN:
(1.380658179 /10^2)^2 + 2.99792458^2
= 8.987742409 k Coulomb's
constant
2002 CODATA
8.987742438
The final equation for the
Coulomb constant listed above, is given as a yield to within 8 significant
figures. An impressive agreement with the 2002 CODATA listing for that
constant. The value as listed in SI is derived from
The appearance of the square
root of 2, in two positions within the molar volume equation above in connection
with the resonance of the proton, indicates the possible presence of scalar
iso-spin as a property of the Yukawa Potential and, therefore, may lead to an
argument in favor of a simple exchange of the pi-meson being composed of
electronic charges of like magnitude as a mediator of nuclear bonding in the
strong hadron interaction. While Hideki Yukawa did receive his Nobel Prize
in Physics for his prediction of the meson... iso-spin is currently recognized
as a property of the pion and is therefore a characteristic associated with the
decay of the charged pion into a muon and a muon type neutrino. Since
another decay mode (less than 1%) has been associated with the charged pion,
where an electron and it's associated neutrino are the result. I have to
theorize wether or not it is the neutron or proton which is in fact decaying in
the former case to yield a muon and it's neutrino. And wether or not it is
the binding electrons or (shared electrons) in the later case which are
decaying. I say this because such a great difference in the observed
masses of objects during a decay mode would indicate a very unusual discrepancy,
resulting in mass-energy non-conservation, in comparing both modes of
decay.
________________________________________
In the following set of
equations, the radius and the wavelength for the electron, both have been
reduced to their permeable values. Since the bound values for the electron
string must represent a Coulomb which is of a greater value, and thus reducing
resistance, then we see that this value is also consistent with the precise
yields for the shielded proton magnetic moment, and the inverse fine-structure
constant. This also agrees with the 1986 CODATA value for the constant of
molar volume, to within 7 significant figures, in both the wavelength and
resonance yields; as well as inclusion of the 2002 CODATA Newtonian
gravitational constant for the inverse fine-structure and the bound electronic
mass unit. The only exception, which is minimal, is the use of the
electron wavelength included in the full Lorentz-transformation to yield the
inverse fine-structure constant. This is consistent for a bound electronic
wavelength, residing somewhere between 2.42629 and 2.4263 10^-12
meter.
18382 * 2^(1/2) * 2.81793012
/10^15 meter /2pi
= 1.165891431 /10^11 meter radius
proton
(18382 * 2^(1/2) *
2.81793012 /10^15 meter /2pi)^(3/2)
= 3.980954057 /10^17 meter sec.
resonance
2^(1/2) /10^10 /(2.81793012
/10^15 * 2^(1/2) * 18382 /2pi)^(3/4)
= .02241410567 m^3 mol^-1 molar
volume
18381 * 2.99792458^2 * (1-
2.426294184 /2.81793012)^(1/2) * 3/2 * 2.426294184
= .02241410568 molar volume
(abstract)
10^5 Pa * 2.426294184 /10^12
* 92380
= .02241410567 m^3 mol^-1 molar
volume
1986 CODATA
.02241410(19)
2^(1/2) /10^20 /pi
/
(2.81793012 /10^15 * 18382 *
2^(1/2) /2pi * 1.602193278 /10^19 /4 *
10^34)^(3/2)
= 1.410573071 /10^26 J T^-1 shielded proton
moment
(1838.1
/92380)^(1/2)
= 1.410573071 shielded proton mag. moment
(abstract)
92380 * 2/3 /(1- 2.426294184
/2.81793012)^(1/2) /2.99792458^2 /10^0
= 18381 charged proton count
(1- 2.426294184
/2.81793012)^(1/2) * 18381 * 3 * 2.99792458^4
= 1.660540069 amu (abstract)
(Lorentz-transform)
2002 CODATA
6.6742(10)
(1- 6.6742097443
/9.80665)^(1/2) * (10^19 /1.602193278)^3 /
(6.02213713 * 10^23 * 2 *
92380 * 3^2)^2 * 10^6
= 137.0358309 a^-1 inverse
fine-structure
80 * (92380
/18380)^(1/3)
= 137.0358309 (abstract)
2.99792458^2 * 10^16 * pi^2
/2^(1/2) /3^2 /10^15 meter /
((1- 2.426298416
/2.81793012)(1+ 2.426298416
/2.81793012))^(1/2)
= 137.0358309 a^-1 inverse fine-structure (Full
Lorentz-transform)
((1- 2.99792458^2
/16.02193278)^(1/2) /2.99792458 /2.42629 /3 * pi)^2
/
6.02213713
= 1.511091471 emu-electronic mass unit
(abstract)
(((1- 2.99792458^2
/16.02193278)^(1/2) /2.99792458 /2.42629 /3 * pi)^2
/
6.02213713 * 9.80665 *
10)^(1/3)
= 5.291804728 Bohr radius (electron domain)
(abstract)
(((1- 2.99792458^2
/16.02193278)^(1/2) /2.99792458 /2.42631058 /3 * pi)^2
/
6.02213713 * 9.80665 *
10)^(1/3)
= 5.291774804 Bohr radius
(abstract)
________________________________________
MUON-PROTON SYMMETRY
BREAKING AT
THE SPEED OF LIGHT
BOUNDARY
Note 2: I will
introduce this note as a prelude to a later discussion on the speed of light in
a vacuum. For now here are some of the
highlights.
While I was sitting in the
coffee shop the other day. A gentleman calmly commented that no one knows
why the speed of light squared... is what it is, and how it defines
energy. I said... I know! And retorted that it is simply r^2, the
area of a square as it might relate to the area of a light circle, as in
THE CIRCUMFERENCE OF
IF:
2 pi * r = circumference
circle
THEN:
2 pi * 2.99792458
= 1.883651567 free mass muon
(abstract)
HENCE: 2
pi * 2.99792458 * 18381 /2070
= 1.672627993 free mass proton (
abstract)
IF:
1.672627993 /10^27 kg * 2070 /18381
= 1.883651567 /10^28 kg free mass
muon
THEN:
1.672627993 /10^27 /2pi *
10^11 m * 10^26 J^-1 T * 2070 /18381
= 2.99792458 * 10^8 m s^-1
OR:
1.672627993 /10^27 /2pi *
10^5 Pa * 10^32 k gram * 2070 /18381
= 2.99792458 * 10^8 m s^-1
SO:
2 pi * 2.99792458 * 10^8 * 10^20 meter * 10^5 Pa /
6.02213713 /10^23 /2
/92380
= .1692941601 MeV muon
neutrino
AGAIN:
2 pi * 2.99792458^3
= .1692941601 MeV muon neutrino
(abstract)
SO:
1.672671 /10^27 kg * 2070 /18382
= 1.883597525 /10^28 kg free mass
muon
THEN:
6pi^5 * 9.109388427 /10^31 kg * 2070 /18382
= 1.883507780 /10^28 kg free mass
muon
HENCE:
6pi^5 * 2070 /18382 * 91^(1/2) * 3 /pi /10^31
kg
= 1.883520172 /10^28 kg Gauss
metric
IF:
pi * c^2 = circumference light
circle
AND:
pi^2 * 2.99792458^2 * 2070 * 9.109388428
= 1.672633219 proton mass proportion
(abstract)
THEN:
pi^2 * 2.99792458^2 * 2070 * 9.109388428 * 3^2
/2.99792458^2
= 1.6749499 neutron mass proportion
(abstract)
OR:
3 /pi^2 /9.109388428^2
= 366.3 times Earth rotation per year
(abstract)
HENCE: 3
/pi^2 /9.11^2
= 366.256 times Earth rotation per year
(abstract)
OR:
6.6421 * 1.675 * 9.11 /6.356516202
= 16.02187159 e Coulomb
(abstract)
THEN:
F = G * M m /R
FINALLY: (1.672627992 *
3663.063308 /3 * 9.109388428 /2070)^(1/2)
= 2.99792458 c (abstract)
Of the first subatomic
particles discovered, the
negative electron, proton
and neutron, then
the positive electron...
next came the lowly muon.
The discovery of the muon,
which was originally
called the mu-meson, was
first achieved by
Carl D. Anderson in
1936.
Since
natural emissions source;
that is, cosmic rays
from outer space. And
I have found that the
origin of the muon is
probably the result of a
fragmenting proton loop at
the neutron-proton
binding exchange
boundary. Then this would
be a symmetry standard for a
radiation constant
within the atomic nucleus of
hydrogen and He4.
It also resides within the
recognized scale for
the so-called quark.
Which I regret to say...
does not exist. At
least not within the currently
accepted theoretical
criteria. This means that
the quark is really the
symmetry position of the
muon in units of energy, and
the muon is really
part and parcel of the
proton. Most importantly,
the muon is one of the most
common natural
fragmenting sub-atomic
particles of greater
mass than the electron in
possession of charge.
Again, this is because ALL
particles and atoms
of greater mass than the
electron, are made
entirely of positive and
negative electrons.
One may also easily see that
the so-called
muon type neutrino voltage,
and therefore the
muon neutrino itself, is
also a symmetry point
that is broken at the speed
of light boundary,
and is also part and parcel
of the proton
configuration segment.
Which, need I say, is
no coincidence. For
example:
IF:
2 pi * r =
circumference
AND:
2 pi * 2.99792458
= 1.883651567 free mass muon
(abstract)
THEN:
2 pi * 2.99792458^3
= .1692941601 MeV muon neutrino
(abstract)
AGAIN:
1.672627993 /10^27 kg * 2070
/18381 * 2.99792458^2 * 10^16 * 10^16
= .1692941601 MeV muon
neutrino
HENCE:
2 pi * 2.99792458^3 /16.02187159
= 105.6644095 MeV free mass muon
(abstract)
FINALLY:
1.672627993 /10^27 kg * 2070
/18381 * 2.99792458^2 * 10^16 /
1.602187159 *
10^19
= 105.6644095 MeV free mass
muon
Now I was examining some of
the 1986 CODATA values for the muon, and took notice that the value which was
listed for the muon-proton magnetic moment ratio, was so close to 1/pi that it
was startling. Now I do realize that I cannot have been the first to see
this... however, with this noted, I will proceed. For
example:
IF:
10 /pi = 3.183098862 muon-proton
mag. moment ratio
1986 CODATA
3.18334547(47)
AND:
(1838.2 /92380)^(1/2)
= 1.410611441 proton magnetic moment
(abstract)
THEN:
(1838.2 /92380)^(1/2) /pi
= 4.490115672 muon magnetic moment
(abstract)
1986 CODATA
4.4904514(15)
PYTHAGORAS AND LIGHT
PROPAGATION
IF:
((1- 3^2 /5^2) * 10^2)^(2/3)
= 4^2
AND:
9.1 /10^32 kg * 2069
= 1.88279 /10^28 kg free mass
muon
HENCE: (1-
2.99792458^2 /3^2)^(1/2) /2 /2069
= 8.987559075 c^2 approx.
(abstract)
SO:
(10^11 * 5^2 /3^2)^(1/12)
= 8.987552872 c^2 approx.
(abstract)
THEN:
8854.187818^(2/12)
= 4.548394458 mass neutrino
(abstract)
FINALLY:
8854.187818^(2/12) * 2 * 3^2 /2.99792458^2
= 9.109388427 mass electron
(abstract)
That the muon magnetic
moment may be yielded by simply dividing pi into the magnetic moment for the
proton should come as no surprise, again, and especially because of where the
muon originates. I really cannot help at this moment, but to reiterate
that the composition of all material objects of greater mass than the neutrino,
is that of positive and negative electrons, and that this one single fact should
be given the greatest importance. Certainly, all radiation including light
and radio, is regulated by the interaction of these electronic objects within
the atom.
I have included a very brief
section above on the application of the Pythagorean theorem, since the
propagation of light is ultimately mechanical in nature. This is so the
reader may understand that there is a geometric relevance to all of this, and
that it is not a mathematical trick. This is because geometric packing
arrangements govern ALL material objects... really! Since materials such
as electrons are not ideal Newtonian solids, there will be some breaking of
ranks, even within their packing arrangements, and this is why we see some
deviation in the yield for the speed of light as measured against the idealized
geometric formula listed above. However, it is sufficiently close to give
some idea of how this works.
It should further be noted
that the permittivity constant is a Gaussian based unit, which is derived from
the surface area of a light sphere as divided into one, where 1/4pi /c^2 =
permittivity. Where the distance in meters from the optical emissions
source, may be any base ten value of 'c' at all, as long as the scale does not
distend below the mean interaction range for the positive-negative electron pair
which comprise the key segment (in any combination as increments of two) of the
emitting object . Now let it be understood, at this point, that light does
not possess a surface area in the sense which is represented here. This is
only a theoretical means to convey the scope of the optical emissions course in
terms of a possible fixed distance as well as a multi-directional pathway.
The geometric equation for the surface area of a light sphere is as
follows. For example:
THE SURFACE AREA OF A LIGHT
SPHERE
IF:
4 pi * r^2 = surface area of
sphere
THEN:
4 pi * 2.99792458^2 * 10^16
= 1.129409067 10^18 surface area light
sphere
units Terra (Sol system)
SO:
(4 pi /10^7 * 2.99792458^2 * 10^16)^-1
= 8.854187818 /10^12 permittivity light
sphere
EARTH
IF:
80 * (92380 /18380)^(1/3)
= 137.0358308 inverse
fine-structure
THEN:
((1- 6.674281524 /9.80665)^(1/2) /16.02187159^3 /3^4
*
2.99792458^4 /80 * 10^6)^3 *
18380
= 92380 hydrogen shell count
HENCE: (1-
6.67427427/ 9.80665)^(1/2) * (10^19 /1.602187159)^3
/
3^4 /(6.02213713 * 10^23 * 2
* 92380)^2 * 10^6
= 137.035989507 inverse
fine-structure
1986 CODATA
137.0359895(61)
OR:
((92380 /18380)^(1/3) /(1-
6.674281524 /9.80665)^(1/2) /10^6 *
16.02187159^3 *
80)^(1/4)
= 2.99792458 c speed of light
(abstract)
HENCE:
((137.035989507 * 10^5 Pa *
3^4 * (10^27 kg * 1.602187159 /10^19)^3 /
(1- 6.67427427
/9.80665)^(1/2))^(1/4)
= 2.99792458 10^8 meter sec^-1
IF
(1- 6.02213713 /6.67410600)^(1/2) * 3^2 * 1.602187159 /10^19
/
1.511091462 * 10^32 kg * 2 *
92380 /18381 /10^6
= 2.99792458 10^8 meter sec^-1
SO:
((1- 6.02213713 /6.67410600)^(1/2) * 3^2 * 1.602187159
/
1.511091462 * 2 *
2.99792458)^(1/2)
= 1.410573071 shielded proton magnetic moment
(abstract)
AND:
(1- 6.02213713 /6.67419359)^(1/2) * 3^2 * 1.602177219 /10^19
/
2.99792458 /10^8 * 2 * 92380
/18382 /10^6
= 1.511091462 /10^32 kg emu electronic mass
unit
OR:
(1- 6.02213713 /6.674233539)^(1/4) * 3^2 * 1.602187159
/
1.511091462 * 3/2 *
6.02213713 /2.99792458^3
= 1
IF:
10^23 * 3^3 /pi /2^(1/2) /2.99792458^4 /10^32 /92380
/
(1- 2.99792458^2
/9.806644193)^(1/2)
= 2.81794092 /10^15 meter radius
electron
THEN:
10^23 /3^3 * pi /2^(1/2) * 2.99792458^2 * 10^16 * 2.81794092 /10^15
*
(1- 2.99792458^2
/9.806644193)^(1/2)
= 6.02213713 * 10^23 NA Number
Avogadro
EARTH ORBITAL VELOCITY AND
THE SPEED OF LIGHT
Through the simple
application of the Lorentz transformation in connection with the earths mean
orbital velocity squared and the speed of light squared, one may obtain several
relationships between this orbital velocity and the speed of light as measured
in a vacuum, as well as other fundamental constants. I would have to say
that I'm not one to fall pray to numerology or geomancy, however, with the
exception of the Astronomical Units below, all of the relevant yields are in
meters. This is quite fascinating. Please excuse the liberty of this
one section, as it is purely theoretical, and still in its exploration
phase. It might be worthy to note, that, since the values for the velocity
included within the numerator of the classic Lorentz transformations below, does
not come close enough to that for the electron mass acceleration transform, and
therefore, to be representative of that value for a fraction of the speed of
light. Then it must represent some other velocity. Also, please
remember that, if we measure the velocity of light in a vacuum from anywhere
near, or around the earth or any of its members, and if the orbital velocity of
the earth about the sun does indeed contribute to our measurement of the speed
of light, in any way... that any allusion to this value within our physics is
also going to be affected by this. Including, but not limited to the
masses of material objects at every scale of measurement within the earth
reference laboratory frame. Now I do realize that if the actual velocity
of light is that of a relative nature... that is fixed but measurement
constrained to a frame of reference. That the equations for my theory of
matter will also be affected by this. However, if the actual mechanical
velocity for light varies only slightly in relation to our reference frame, then
this will change our view... but only a little. None the less, different
it must be. But then again, as I have already stated, this is only a
theory of mine.
IF:
(((18382+92380)
/16.02187159)^(1/2) /(1- 2.4263096516 /2.81794092)^(1/2) * 20)^(2/3)
*
3 /91
/2.99792458
= 2.979818729 Earth mean orbital velocity
(abstract)
WHERE:
29.798189720 kilometer sec^-1 = Earth mean orbital
velocity
(1- 2.9798189720^2
/2.99792458^2)^(1/2) /10^-8 meter
= 10973735.64 meter^-1 Rydberg
constant
OR:
10^5 Pa * 3^3 * pi /2 /2^(1/2) * (1+ 2.426280808 /2.81794092)^(1/2)
/
(1- 2.426280808
/2.81794092)^(1/2)
= 10973735.65 Rydberg constant
WHERE:
29.800247992 kilometer sec^-1 = Earth mean orbital
velocity
(1- 2.9800247992^2
/2.99792458^2)^(1/2) * 2.99792458^2 * 10^16 / 10^15
meter
= 9.80665 meter sec^-1 gravitational
acceleration
HENCE:
(9.80665 /(1- 2.9800247992^2
/2.99792458^2)^(1/2) * 10^15 meter)^(1/2)
= 2.997924579 * 10^8 meter sec^-1
WHERE:
29.799859930 kilometer sec^-1 = Earth mean orbital
velocity
(1- 2.979985993^2
/2.99792458^2)^(1/2) * 4 * 2^(1/2) * 10
= 6.179069909 AU Earth orbital
circumference
Earth - Wikipedia
6.1790699007 AU
WHERE:
29.799785962 kilometer sec^-1 = Earth mean orbital
velocity
(1- 2.9799785962^2
/2.99792458^2)^(1/2) * 4 * 2^(1/2)
= .618033989 golden mean
(inverse)
IF:
(18382 /2070)^(1/2)
= 2.979965308 Earth mean orbital velocity
(abstract)
AND:
1.672671 /10^27 kg * 2070 /18382
= 1.883597525 /10^28 kg free mass
muon
AND:
2 pi * 2.99792458
= 1.883651567 free mass muon
(abstract)
OR:
(18381 /2070)^(1/2)
= 2.979884250 Earth mean orbital velocity
(abstract)
THEN:
29,798.842500^2 * 2pi * 2.99792458 * 10^8 /10^23 /(10^11
meters)^2
= 1.672627993 /10^27 kg free mass
proton
SO:
29,799.225595^2 * 2pi * 2.99792458 * 10^8 /(10^11 meters)^2
/
18381 /1.511091462 * 10^32
kg
= 6.02213713 * 10^23 NA Number
Avogadro
IF:
(1- 6.372832122 /6.6740)^(1/2) * 3 *10^4
= 6,372.832121 Earth mean radius
(abstract)
Earth -
Wikipedia 6,372.797
km Earth mean radius
THEN:
6,372.63423 /(1- 6.37263423/ 6.67421)^(1/2) *
10^4
= 2.99792458 * 10^8 meters
IF:
18406 * pi^2 /6 * (1- 6.3780291086/ 6.67421)^(1/2) *
10^3
= 6,378,029.1082 meters Earth equatorial
radius
Earth -
Wikipedia 6,378.137
km
OR:
6,378,029.1086 /(1- 6.3780291086 /6.67421)^(1/2) /
pi^2 * 6 * 9.1 /10^32 kg
/10^3
= 1.674946 /10^27 kg free mass
neutron
THEN:
6.67421 * 1.674946 * 9.109388616 /1.602177219
= 6.355933651 Earth polar radius
(abstract)
OR:
3 /pi^2 /9.109388428^2
= 366.3 times Earth rotation per
year (abstract)
HENCE: 3
/pi^2 /9.11^2
= 366.256 times Earth rotation per year
(abstract)
OR:
6.67421 * 1.675 * 9.11 /6.356516202
= 16.02187159 e Coulomb
(abstract)
Earth -
Wikipedia
6,356.752 km Earth polar radius
THEN:
(Coulomb) F = G * M'n * m'e /R
FINALLY:
(1.672627992 * 3663.063308 /3 * 9.109388428
/2070)^(1/2)
= 2.99792458 c (abstract)
Now this may be a bit
presumptuous of me, but based upon what I suspect, it would not be to much to
ask that a measurement for the velocity of light be taken well outside of the
earth reference laboratory frame. A measurement of this nature, should be
made between two synchronous space bourn satellite platforms, not traveling at a
velocity any where near that of the orbital speed of the earth. And
preferably, outside of the entire solar system. Since with our existing
technology, we cannot currently extricate ourselves from the galactic plane and
therefore the orbital velocity of our entire solar system, it would be
sufficient only to perform the less aggressive test afore mentioned. Also,
our sun happens to be the most luminous object with the greatest magnetic field,
that we experience within the closest proximity to Earth. Now I do realize
that the velocity for light existing anywhere in the neighborhood of 10^8 meters
per second is quite large, however, the earths orbital velocity of 29.8
kilometers per second is also a fairly good clip. And it would also not be
to unreasonable to consider that this velocity is one of an angular
nature. What further affect would this factor have upon the measurements
for any of our so-called constants. It surely is a great factor in the
role of our gravity, and therefore, a factor in our measurements related to our
gravity. Einstein even proposed that gravity bends light in the locality
of stars, and he was gloriously vindicated in his proposal.
See:
RED-SHIFT AND QUASI-STELLAR
OBJECTS
THE HOLOGRAPHIC
UNIVERSE
by Brian S.
McMillan
http://www.godkings.com/quasar.txt
Note 3: All of the
following notations, attempt to preserve the constant for the speed of light in
a vacuum at it's best currently measured value, and this as a means to determine
the geometric correctness for the yields of the equations. This is treated
as an electromagnetic radiation constant which may not be differentiated from
the mechanical workings of the atom itself, as this electromagnetic mechanism is
directly responsible for the various modes of radioactive propagation, as well
as the configurations of the atoms and sub-atoms which support this natural
scheme. There may some apparent contradiction in the behavioral
fluctuations for the discussed values, but this is only categorical, and may be
understood in terms of the various modes of propagation. Remember, we are
dealing with dynamic structures... not static ones. Therefore, some of the
so-called constants, cannot possibly be constant. While I am not the first
person to question this, it has never so subjectively apparent as in my own path
to the truth. These observations are based upon six equational sets (two
classical and four which I discovered), and their notations, as they might
relate to two main categories of propagating modes. That is the bound
electromagnetic strings vs free electromagnetic radiation. The six main
equations along with their combinations are listed along with their accompanying
narrative. I have listed them somewhat haphazardly, that is in no
particular order, except to illustrate a nuclear or atomic state. I hope
it's not too confusing. Thank you.
I have found that when
electrons are bound into strings, that the Coulomb or electronic charge, appears
to increase. This increase is directly proportional to a drop in
resistance. Conversely, when there is an increase in resistance, the
Coulomb apparently decreases. This first set of equations illustrate this
relation. For example:
SET
1
IF:
(1- 2.99792458^2 /16.02187159)^(1/2)
= 6.626045674 h Planck-Lorentz
(abstract)
AND:
2 * 3^6 /91 = 16.02197802 e-MAX geometric
(abstract)
THEN:
(1- 2.99792458^2 /2 /3^6 * 91)^(1/2)
= 6.626073883 h-MAX bound to free
electron
wavelength threshold.
IF:
10^5 Pa * 3^3 * pi /2 /2^(1/2) * (1+ 2.426280808 /2.81794092)^(1/2)
/
(1- 2.426280808
/2.817940920)^(1/2)
= 10973735.65 Rydberg constant
THEN:
10^5 Pa * 10^19 *
(1- 2.426280808
/2.817899955)(1- 2.99792458^2 /2 /3^6 * 91 e-MAX) *
pi^2
= 6.02213713 * 10^23 NA Number
Avogadro
If the Coulomb, or charge of
the electron begins to fluctuate above the range for the free electronic
charge. We must consider that this represents a property of the bound
electronic state. And this indicates that any attempt to arbitrarily
regulate the values to a point outside of their respective hierarchy, means that
the functional relationship between the objects becomes too abstract to consider
from the viewpoint of a natural state, and therefore, must represent at least
two different configurative modes. That is of free emission V.S. bound, or
non-emission.
Combination
IF:
((1- 2.99792458^2 /2 /3^6 *
91 e-MAX)^(1/2) /2.99792458 /2.426310345 * 2.81794092 *
10^3)^(1/2)
= 16.02177219 Coulomb free electron
(abstract)
THEN:
(602213713 * 10^23 /10^24
/
(1- 2.4263096516
/2.81794092) /(1- 2.99792458^2
/16.02177219))^(1/2)
= 3.141592654 pi
HENCE: (1-
2.99792458^2 /16.02187159)^(1/2) /2.99792458
/9.109388616
=
2.4263
wavelength electron
(abstract)
OR:
(1- 2.99792458^2 /16.02197135)^(1/2) /2.99792458
/9.109388616
= 2.426309651 wavelength electron
(abstract)
In the above set of
equations, if we maintain the free mass of the electron as a static value, which
we cannot... because if we do, then as the Coulomb increases (within the
brackets), the wavelength will also appear to increase. This means that we
are dealing with a free electron or free charge. Since the free mass of
the electron does not remain constant in relation to it's energy, it's mass
should also appear to increase as the wavelength decreases. This is
because the Coulomb has a minimum and a maximum range, which differs for the
free vs bound objects, when those considerations are taken into account.
Since the value for the Coulomb has only been determined for the charge which is
equivalent to the free electron, (which would have been difficult to externally
measure otherwise, since until only recently it was not even thought of that
electrons bind to form strings; and considering that when Robert Millikan
performed his oil droplet experiment, that he was measuring free electronic
charges clinging to the oil itself, and no doubt a very clever feat at
that). When the values within these equations are arbitrarily altered,
then fluctuations in the remaining values may also be inferred. It should
also be noted that Dr. Millikan, was more importantly and correctly, measuring
the unity of the Coulomb as a constant value, when all other factors are
themselves reduced to a constancy.
The Coulomb for the bound
electron (and electrons DO bind) is therefore, somewhat of a misnomer, since
either the emission or absorption energy must be known, or the potential between
the cathode and anode must be reliably established. Because, in reality...
free electrons DO NOT travel at the speed of light, they travel at various
velocities. At least from all natural, conventional or synthetically
stimulated emissions sources. I say this because bound electron strings
actually motivate the optical component of light, and ARE pumped out of -- and
away from -- the atom at a mechanically constant velocity. Wether or not,
we actually measure this constant velocity as an objective value, has long been
a discussion for science and anthropomorphic philosophy. I will,
therefore, attempt to shed more light on the issue concerning the emissions
mechanism for optical radiation.
Also, when electrons couple
to form loops or circular structures of an atomic or subatomic scale, then the
wavelength associated with these electromagnetic structures appears to slightly
decrease. This is for a very obvious reason. Since curving component
structures of an interlocking nature, will always contract toward the inside of
the curve, the resulting measurement will slightly favor the smaller average
dimension; even though the outside of the curve is slightly extended. This
is because the shortest distance between two points is a straight line.
Though, electron strings may be straight or curved, they are dimensional objects
of volume... they are not lines. Conversely, when these electronic
filaments are stretched or subject to tension, there will be an accompanying
increase in the structural dimension of their string. Since the emission
lines for optical spectra are measured in relation to entry at the index of
refraction for the hard optical component of light, and this frequency does not
actually change; which I might add, is a faithful reflection of the
rotation rate for the components of the electron-positron filament connecting it
to the emitting atom, then this stretching reveals itself through a shift in its
position on the spectral scale as defined for the splitting of the spectrum in
the introduction to this dissertation. Hence, the 'red
shift'.
PLANCK-LORENTZ
REDSHIFT
AND THE DIATOMIC EMISSIONS
STANDARD
IF:
(1- 2.99792458^2 /16.02177219)^(1/2)
= 6.626019502 Planck
THEN:
10^5 Pa * 10^19 *
(1- 2.4263095713
/2.817940764)(1- 2.99792458^2 /16.02177219) *
pi^2
= 6.02213713 10^23 NA Number
Avogadro
HENCE: -6
/10^15 *
(((1- 2.99792458^2
/16.02177219) /(1+ 2.99792458^2 /16.02177219))^(1/2)
-1)
= 2.817940764 /10^15 meter classic electron
radius
OR:
10^3 * (1+ 2.817940764 /6)(1+ 2.99792458^2
/16.02177219)^(1/2)
= 1836.16467 m'P/m'e ratio
SO:
1836.16467 * 9.109388428 /10^32 kg
= 1.672633720 /10^27 kg free mass
proton
ALSO:
(1- 2.817940764 /6)(1+ 2.99792458^2 /16.02177219)^(1/2)
/
2.99792458
/9.109388428
= 2.426290434 lambda electron
(abstract)
FINALLY:
((1- 2.817940764 /6)(1- 2.99792458^2 /16.02177219) +1)^(1/2)
*
pi^2 * 3^2
/2.99792458^2
= 1.097373995 Rydberg constant
(abstract)
TRANSITIONAL
PLANCK
IF:
(10 /pi^2 * 6.02213713 /(1- 2.4263095173
/2.817940764))^(1/2)
= 6.626019502 Planck
(abstract)
THEN:
(10 /pi^2 * 6.02213713 /(1- 2.4262904336
/2.817918600))^(1/2)
= 6.626019502 Planck
(abstract)
AND:
(1- 2.99792458^2 /16.02177219)^(1/2)
= 6.626019502 h Planck-Lorentz
(abstract)
OR:
16.02177219^2 * pi * 2.99792458 * 2.4262904335 *
((1- 2.4263095606
/2.817940764) /10 /6.02213713)^(1/2)
= 2.817940764 radius electron
(abstract)
HENCE:
16.02177219^2 * pi * 2.99792458 * 2.4262904335 *
((1- 2.4263095173
/2.817940764) /10 /6.02213713)^(1/2)
= 2.81794092 radius electron
(abstract)
FINALLY: 16.02177219^2
* pi * 2.99792458 * 2.4262933090 *
((1- 2.426310580
/2.8179409200) /10 /6.02213713)^(1/2)
= 2.81794092 radius electron
(abstract)
In addition, I have found
that in order to keep the Planck constant... constant. That, while the
wavelength for the electron becomes shorter, the radial measurement for the
electron will also appear to shorten. Since the actual electron radius,
does not become smaller, at least not to the degree which is represented
here. Then it must be that the permeability of the electronic objects
becomes greater, and therefore the binding distance along the neutrino arms will
also become shorter as the electron-positron pairs begin to compress into one
another. We may therefore observe, in the final set of equations above,
that as the wavelength becomes greater, the radius of the electron will also
increase. This is further complicated by the fact that as this is all
going on, that the Coulomb is also NOT remaining static. However, these
equations do provide some insight as to the mechanical inner workings of the
atom. It may also be stated, that as the tension of the Gravity II strings
or magnetic filaments begins to increase, that this electronic thread will begin
to stretch along its axis of transmission and therefore, the binding distance
along the neutrino arms will also begin to increase. The red shift
actually occurs as the optical string is caught up in a web of tension between
the light emitting object and the observer, because the magnetic fields of the
stellar bodies along the light emissions pathway are actually pulling the
electromagnetic string away from a perfect, linear transmission axis, and
therefore, slightly slowing the emissions velocity of the optical signal.
To compensate for this, the non-optical string will begin to stretch or
accordion along its axis (as rope also tends to do) and the velocity of the
signal will be maintained. Thus, the
red-shift.
Obviously, if we consider
that the free electron wavelength is measured in relation to an independent
electronic body, and according to the accepted average for this measurement
through the De Broglie wave equation represented in the 1986 CODATA constants
table; we may further infer that this measurement will include a value for the
electron radius which lies outside of it's classical bonding distance. And
this is precisely what happens. For
example:
IF:
((1- 2.426310580
/2.817968355) /(1+ 2.426310580 /2.817968355))^(1/2) / 3
/10^29
= 9.109388616 /10^31 kg free mass
electron
THEN:
((1- 2.4263093221
/2.81794092) /(1+ 2.4263093221 /2.81794092))^(1/2) / 3 /10^29 *
999
= 91 bound mass electron @ approx. .999 free mass
(abstract)
The accompanying wavelength,
then, appears to increase, while the electron radius increases. It must be
noted at this point, that the radius of the electron may actually increase or
decrease in proportion to the energy that it possesses, but only in relation to
a very small amount. The changes in radial length which are given within
all of these equations, again, only represent the permeable binding distance,
and do not attempt to adjust the actual radius for the electron. When this
distance appears to decrease or increase beyond a reasonable amount (as in the
first example above) then, it is more likely that the electron is no longer
bound.
THEN:
2pi * 1.602177219 / 10^0
/(1- 2.817938508^2 /2.99792458^2)^(3/2) /
2.99792458^2 /10^16
meter
= 2.81793852 /10^15 meter electron
radius
permeable (theoretical)
SO:
((1- 2.426299499
/2.817938508) /(1+ 2.426299499 /2.817938508))^(1/4)
/
3^3 * 2.99792458^3
/pi
= 1.660540068 amu (abstract)
HENCE:
(1/2 * 2069 /18381 * 92380^2
/(1838.2 * 2.4263)^(1/3))^(2/3) * 2pi /
2.99792458^3
/9.109388428
= 2.426290998 lambda electron
(abstract)
THEREFORE:
10 * 3^3 * 2pi * 92380
*
((1+ 2.426291 /2.817928638)
/(1- 2.426291 /2.817928638))^(1/4)
= 2.99792458 10^8 meter
sec^-1
Based on the last two
equations, it (may) be that when the speed of light in a vacuum is met with its
measured value, that the (permeable) radial and wavelength values used in the
above equation, will not fall much below the ones that I have utilized, that is,
for example: much below 2.42629 for the wavelength of the electron.
Likewise, when the radius of the electron is at its maximum reckoning as in the
same formatted equation, below... then the wavelength and radius both share in
this limitation. It must be cautioned, that while the minimum (pertaining
to both values simultaneously) applies to both the nuclear and atomic standard,
these figures are only tentative, and the maximum values would only apply to the
atomic emissions standard for the shell of the hydrogen atom. I say this,
because, in the previous equations for the minimum values immediately
above. I have utilized the emu count for the charged muon in relation to
that of the proton. Which we have seen, are bound at the hip,
so-to-speak.
SO:
10 * 3^3 * 2pi * 92380
*
((1+ 2.426301575
/2.81794092) /(1- 2.426301575
/2.81794092))^(1/4)
= 2.99792458 10^8 meter
sec^-1
HENCE:
3^6 * 8pi^2 * 92380^3
*
((1+ 2.426301575
/2.81794092) /(1- 2.426301575
/2.81794092))^(1/2)
= 1.660540068 amu
(abstract)
AGAIN:
((1- 2.4263015752
/2.81794092) /(1+ 2.4263015752 /2.81794092))^(1/4)
/
3^3 /4pi * 10^7 * 2 *
2.99792458 * 10^0
= 92380 hydrogen shell count
OR:
((1- 2.4263015752
/2.81794092) /(1+ 2.4263015752 /2.81794092))^(1/4)
/
3^3 /pi * 2.99792458^3
/10^26
= 1.660540068 /10^27 kg atomic mass
unit
HENCE:
((1- 2.4263 /2.8179390905)
/(1+ 2.4263 /2.8179390905))^(1/4) /
3^3 /4pi * 10^7 * 2 *
2.99792458 * 10^0
= 92380 hydrogen shell count
SO:
((1- 2.4262869732
/2.81794092) /(1+ 2.4262869732 /2.81794092))^(1/2)
/
3 / 10^34 * 10^5
Pa
= 9.109388427 /10^31 kg free mass
electron
THEN:
(((1- 2.4262869732
/2.81794092) /(1+ 2.4262869732 /2.81794092))^(1/2)
/
3 / 10^34 * 10^5 Pa *
2.81794092 /10^15 meter)^(1/2)
= 1.602177219 /10^19 e
Coulomb
OR:
(10^12 /2.4262872094 / 92380
* 2^(1/2) /10^15)^(4/3) * pi * 2^(1/2) /18382
= 2.81794092 /10^15 meter radius
electron
AND:
(2.4263 * 1838.2)^(1/3) / 3^5 /2
/1.5110864715
= 2.241404124 molar volume
(abstract)
HENCE: (1.5110864715
/10^32 * 9.80665)^(1/3)
= 5.291798892 /10^11 meters Bohr radius
SO:
((10^5 * 2.42631 /10^12 *
18381)^(1/3) /3^5 /2 /2.2414 *10^2 *
9.80665)^(1/3) * 10^-10
meter
= 5.291772573 /10^11 Bohr radius
THEN:
(6.672655813
/((18406-18381)^(1/2) -1) /91 /2.4263 * 2 *
9.80665)^(1/3)
= 5.291772573 Bohr radius
(abstract)
ALSO:
(2.42631 * 1838.2)^(1/3) /3^5 /2 /1.511091462
= 2.241399801
2002 CODATA
2.2413996(39)
THEN:
((10^5 * 2.4263106 /10^12 *
18381)^(1/3) /3^5 /2 /2.241399482 *
10^2 * 9.80665)^(1/3) *
10^-10 meter
= 5.291773126 /10^11 Bohr radius
IF:
92380 * 2.81794092 /10^15 * 2^(1/2) /2pi
= 5.859289696 /10^11 meters radius
hydrogen
THEN:
(5.859289696 /10^11 -
5.291773126 /10^11)^(3/2) /(18381+92380) *
18382 * 2.99792458 * 10^8 *
3/ 4pi * 10^7 * pi^2 * 2^(1/2)
= .02241406102 molar volume
SO:
(5.859289696 /10^11 -
5.291773126 /10^11)^(3/2) * 2 * 3^7 * 92380 *
6.02213713 * 10^23/
2.99792458 /10^8
= 10973735.64 Rydberg constant
OR:
(18382 * 2.4263 /10^12 * 10^5 Pa)^(1/3) * 2/3 * 10^8
meter
= 10973735.65 Rydberg constant
1986 CODATA
1.0973731534(13)
FINALLY:
(10973735.654 * 4pi /10^7 /3 * 2.99792458 * 10^0)^2
/
2^(1/2)
/pi^2
= 13.60544872 eV Rydberg constant
Since: 3^7 /2.99792458
= 729.5046762... which
is very close to the
fine-structure constant. And
the Rydberg constant is
yielded as: me c a^2 /2h.
This must mean that the
third to the last equation
above, must have the
remaining fine-structure
constant, embedded somewhere
within the format
of the
equation.
HENCE:
4pi /(10 * 18383/ 92380)^(1/2) * 2^(1/2) / 2pi * 16 /10^20
/
1.602187159 *
10^19
= 2.002315526 ge electron
g-factor
1986 CODATA
2.002319304386(20)
FINALLY:
4pi /(18383/ 92380)^(1/2) * 2^(1/2) / 2pi * 16 /10^20
/
1.602187159 * 10^19 /2 -
2
= 1.165938828 muon mag. anomaly
1986 CODATA
1.1659230(84) magnetic moment anomaly
IF:
3 * pi^2 /2^(1/2) *
1.235572368 * 2.99792458 /
(18380 * 2.81794092 /10^15 *
2^(1/2) /2pi)
= 6.652461539 Thomson cross
section
1986 CODATA
.66524616(18) = (8pi /3) r'e^2
THEN:
18380 * 1.511091023 /10^32
/2.99792458^2 /10^16 * 1.6 /3 /2^(1/2) *
9.109388429 /10^31
/6.626045764 * 10^34 * 10^23
= 1.602187159 /10^19 Coulomb
e
IF:
(139.5634689 MeV-105.6593607 MeV)/ 2/ 3^2
= 1.883561567 mass muon
(abstract)
AND:
(139.5634689 MeV-105.6593607 MeV)/ 2/ 3^2 *
2.99792458^2 * 10^16 /
1.602187159 * 10^19 /10^34
= 105.6593609 MeV muon
SO:
(938272312.8 + 105659360.9 - 939565632.8)/3^2 /
10^10
meter
= .001159622677 ae electron mag.
anomaly
1986 CODATA
1.159652193(10) /10^3
THEN:
(139563468.9-105657285.9) * 1.602187159 /10^19 /
2.99792458^2 /10^16/ 4/
10^3
= 1.51109146 /10^32 kg emu
That the dimensions and
resonance of the muon
is directly related to that
of the mass and energy of
the proton is illustrated in
the notations below.
Which makes a lot of sense,
when one considers
where the muon
originates. This is truly amazing.
IF:
2069 * 1.511091462 /10^32 * 6.02213713 * 10^0
= 1.88279 /10^28 kg free mass
muon
SO:
(2069 * 2^(1/2) * 2.81794092 /10^15
/2pi)^(3/2)
= 1.503284763 /10^18 meter sec.
AND:
(2069 * 2^(1/2) * 2.81794092 /10^15 /2pi)^(3/2) /
1.602187159 * 10^19 *
10^8
= 938.2703854 MeV mp c^2 / e energy
proton
1986 CODATA
938.2723128
THEN:
(2069 * 2^(1/2) * 2.81794092 /10^15 /2pi)^(3/2) /
2.99792458^2 /10^16 *
10^8
= 1.672629876 /10^27 kg free mass
proton
SO:
4pi * (10^5 * 2.42631058 /10^12 * 92380)^3 *
6.02213713 * 10^23 *
1.672629876 /10^27 kg /4pi * 10^7
= .1134288529 u (exact)
CODATA (1986-2002)
.1134289
HENCE:
2069 * 2^(1/2) * 1.511091462 * 2/3 /pi
= 938.2641192 energy proton
(abstract)
SO:
4/3 * pi * (10^5 Pa *
2.42631058 /10^12 meter * 92382)^3 /
2.99792458 /10^8 meter * s
/2^(1/2) /10^4 meter /4pi * 10^7
= 8.854097518 /10^12 F m^-1 e0
(approx.)
FINALLY:
4/3 * pi * (10^5 Pa *
2.4262925647 /10^12 meter * 92383)^3 /
2.99792458 /10^8 meter * s
/2^(1/2) /10^4 meter /4pi * 10^7
= 8.854187818 /10^12 F m^-1 e0
(exact)
CODATA (1/u0c^2)
8.854187818
HENCE: (10^5 *
2.4262925647 /10^12 meter * pi^2 /2)^(1/2) *
3/2 /1.511091462 * 10^32 /
(18381+92380) /10^23
= 9.806636953 g acceleration
hydrogen
SO:
((1 - 9.8066371538 /9.80665)^(1/2) /pi^2 * 10 +1) *
9.274015431
/10^24
= 928.4770052 /10^26 J T^-1
u'e
1986 CODATA
928.47701(31)
The moment for the muon type
neutrino is shown
below, where the shell of
the hydrogen atom has
absorbed an incoming photon
composed of one
positive and one negative
electron to elicit the
emissions transition of a
single electron or even
a light photon where
diatomic hydrogen or two
hydrogen shells are
involved.
FINALLY:
(20/ 2070 *
6.626045764/10^34 /2^(1/2))^(1/2) * 92382 /
pi /3^2 * 2.99792458^4 *
10^32 * 1.511091462 /10^32 *
6.02213713 * 10^23
/10^6
= .5109974393 MeV electron
OR:
(20/ 2070 *
6.626045764/10^34 /2^(1/2))^(1/2) * 92382 /
pi /3^2 * 2.99792458^4 *
10^32 * 1.511091462 /10^32 *
6.02213713 * 10^23 /10^6 *
2
= 1.021994979 MeV photon
The mass of the electron
type neutrino was
reckoned by myself in 1993
to be an object
which could change shape at
approximately
1/2 the mass of the bound
electron. This
neutral object was
determined to exist as a
body which was the square
root of three
degree's of freedom in the
permittivity of a
vacuum. At the sixth
root of the permittivity
of the electron, that is
(1/4pi/c^2)^(1/6) for
it's mass... this was a
difficult value to obtain.
First, because I had to
determine it's physical
nature as a component of the
charged electron.
Second, it was theoretically
proposed to be
composing the electron as
two counter rotating
components at 1/4 the speed
of light squared.
And traveling close to 10^8
meters / sec squared
as a voltage determined by
Albert Einsteins
famous energy
equation. I am proud to bring
this to you
all...
IF:
8854.187818^(1/6)
= 4.548394458 mass neutrino
(abstract)
THEN:
4.548394458/ 10^32 * 2 * (2.99792458 /4 * 10^8)^2
*
10^16 * 10^5
Pa
= .5109866343 MeV electron
The bound mass of the
neutral electron is as follows.
IF:
7.552791243 /10^33 kg mass electron type
neutrino
THEN:
7.552791243 /10^33 kg * 2 * 3^2 * 6.02213713 * 10^23
/
1.602177219 * 10^19
/10^6
= .5109990285 MeV me c^2 / e
1986 CODATA
.51099906(15)
AGAIN:
2 * 4.548394458 * 3^2 /16.02177219
= .5109990285 MeV
(abstract)
THEN:
7.552791243 /10^33 kg * 2 * 3^2 * 6.02213713 * 10^23
/
2.99792458^2 /10^16
/10^6
= 9.109388427 /10^31 kg free mass
electron
OR: 2 *
4.548394458 * 3^2 /2.99792458^2
= 9.109388428 free mass electron
(abstract)
SO:
(2pi * 2.81794092 /10^15 * 2
* 9.109388427 /10^31 /4pi * 10^7)^(1/2)
= 1.602177219 /10^19 Coulomb
HENCE:
7.552791243 /10^33 kg * 4 * 3^2 * 6.02213713 * 10^23
/
1.602177219 * 10^19
/10^6
= 1.021998057 MeV photon
FINALLY:
10^10 meter * 2^(1/2) * 2 * 4.548394458 /10^32 kg /
(2^(1/2) * 2.81794092 /10^15
meter * 18381 /2pi /10^7)^(3/2)
= 1.021995287 MeV photon
Which again... makes a lot
of sense. The last equation above for the photon voltage, being a factor
in a percentage of the radius of the proton as a resonance of the same, and
divided into twice the mass of the neutrino times the square root of two.
Really, brings it home. Again, you may note, that the radius for the
electron is given as its free nominal value, and may be slightly adjusted or
reduced. This will result in a better value for the voltage of the photon
in relation to the actual permeability of the component arms of the neutrinos
which make up the electrons that are represented by this
voltage.
________________________________________
IF:
(10^5 * 2 * 18380 /92380)^(2/3) * 2 * 4.548394458 *
9.1
= 96485.31215 Faraday constant
1986 CODATA
96485.309(29)
SO:
96485.31215 / (10^5 * 2 * 18380 /92380)^(2/3) / 9.1/
2
= 4.548394458 mass neutrino
(abstract)
THEN:
(96485.31215 * (92380/ 18380/ 2/ 10^5)^(2/3) / 9.1/
2)^6
= 8854.187819 Permittivity of
vacuum
1986 CODATA
8.854187818
OR:
(10^5 * 2 * 18380
/92380)^(2/3) * 80 * 4.548394458^2/ 9pi *
2^(1/2)
= 96485.16472 Faraday constant
HENCE:
(10^32 kg * 4pi /10^7 *
8.854187818 /10^12 /3^6 /pi^4)^(1/3) *
18380/ 92380/ 7.297350377 *
10^3 * 2^(1/2)
= 96485.31215 Faraday constant
SO: 18380/
92380/ 7.297350377 * 10^3 * 2^(1/2) /
(2.99792458^2 * 10^16 * 3^6
* pi^4 /10^32 kg)^(1/3)
= 96485.31215 Faraday constant
FINALLY: P'l/
H'l /a * sqrt 2 /(3^6 * pi^4 c^2 /kg)^(1/3)
= F Faraday
I've included the last few
equations above, because they represent an interesting geometric relationship
between the average abstract bound electron mass, and the abstraction for the
mass of the neutrino; as they might relate to the hydrogen proportion and the
fine-structure constant to yield Faraday. As with the equation for the
shielded proton magnetic moment, the above examples contain within their terms,
6 out of 7 of the same elements which I have used to formulate other fundamental
constants. I am pointing this out, because of the nature of
mathematics. That is, since numbers, through certain operations, may be
arranged to yield any value at all. There may or may not be a true
relationship within the format of the equations. However, when certain
corresponding elements are present within the body of the equations, as well as
a yield to within 7 or 8 significant figures, this will then narrow the odds in
favor of a valid mathematical argument. I know that you will agree.
And again, I must reiterate, that the relationships which are represented within
the body of the equations are attributable to the basic elements which are
present within the composition of the hydrogen atom and its corresponding
fundamental class of particles and universal constants. The greater the
simplicity and agreement in value for the equation, the greater the significance
of the results. Although not always... this is usually true. The
equation which follows immediately below, is a prime example of this. And
you will soon see why.
IF:
1.3956346891 * 1.602187159
= 5^(1/2)
SO: (1^2 +
2^2)^(1/2) /10^11 /1.602187159 * 10^19
= 139.5634689 MeV charged
pion
THEN:
5^(1/2) /10^11 meter /1.602187159 * 10^19
= 139.5634689 MeV charged
pion
HENCE: 5^(1/2) /10^11
/(1.511091462 /10^32 * 4 * 10^3 *
2.99792458^2 * 10^16
/1.602187159 * 10^19 + 105657285.9)
= 1.602187159 /10^19 Coulomb
The first notation above
(the discovery) would indicate that the hypotenuse as the square root of 5 is
due to an odd number of electron and positron charges, representing a 2:1 ratio,
for the binding configuration of the charged pion. The final two equations
suggest that the electronic masses which make up this pion are NOT participating
as (boson like) mediators during the strong hadron interaction, but rather they
are a by product of the forced disintegration of the nucleon class and are,
therefore, part of the composition of those particles prior to decay.
While the electronic charges may, at times, be part of the composition of the
nucleon class objects themselves... this may not always be the case. That
is, it may be possible that the charged pion is sometimes manufactured within
the domain of the nucleus as electrons are being fed into it from an outside
source. At a distance of about 2.236 * 10^-11 meters, this maintains the
correct magnitude or scale for the mean interaction range in meters for the
proton or neutron at roughly twice the nuclear radius for those individual
objects, and would favor the an-istoropy or combined isometry of the body of
charges while they are involved in a simple exchange. With this
understood, we may now digress to the muon.
For
example:
IF:
2069 * 1.511091462 /10^32 * 6.02213713 * 10^0
= 1.88279 /10^28 free mass muon
ALSO: 2070 *
1.511091462 /10^32 * 6.02213713 * 10^0
= 1.88370 /10^32 free mass muon
HENCE:
2069 * 1.511091462 /10^32 * 6.02213713 * 10^0 *
2.99792458^2 * 10^16
/1.602187159 * 10^19
= 105.6160795 MeV muon
THEN: 10^-8 meter
/10^5 Pa * 2070 * 1.511091462 /10^32 /
1.602187159 * 10^19
/2^(1/2)
= 1.380488689 /10^23 k
approximately
IF:
((1.1660405151/10^11-5^(1/2)
/10^11 /2) * (pi /10^2)^2)^(1/2)
= 2.176707201 /10^8 kg Planck
mass
THEN:
((1.1660407000/10^11-5^(1/2)
/10^11 /2) * (pi /10^2)^2)^(1/2)
= 2.176711393 /10^8 kg Planck
mass
1986 CODATA
2.17671(14)
IF:
(139.5634689 MeV-105.6593607 MeV)/ 2/ 3^2
= 1.883561567 mass muon
(abstract)
AND:
(139.5634689 MeV-105.6593607 MeV)/ 2/ 3^2 *
2.99792458^2 * 10^16 /
1.602187159 * 10^19 /10^34
= 105.6593609 MeV muon
THEN:
(139563468.9-105657285.9) * 1.602187159 /10^19 /
2.99792458^2 /10^16/ 4/
10^3
= 1.51109146 /10^32 kg emu
4000/ 10^3 * 1.511091462
/10^32 * 2.99792458^2 * 10^16 /
1.602187159 * 10^19 *
6.02213713 * 10^0
= .2041876838 MeV muon
neutrino
SO:
4 * 1.511091462 /10^32 * 2.99792458^2 * 10^16 /
1.602187159 * 10^19 *
6.02213713 * 10^0
= .2041876838 MeV muon
neutrino
Since there cannot be an
actual voltage associated with objects which are composed of equal numbers of
electrons and positrons. The neutrino listed above would have to actually
be closer to .17 MeV volts... The value listed in the sentence above in MeV is
the one measured in the laboratory and therefore represents the free mass
voltage.
When the volts of the
charged muon is subtracted from the voltage assigned to the charged pion the
yield is almost precisely 200 times the so-called muon type neutrino
voltage. No voltage, or it's equivalent, may ever be truely reliable for
any charge neutral object, wether through a secondary measurement or not.
The measurement for the so-called neutron magnetic moment is perfect testimony
to this. The yielded volts, equivalent to 200 muon type neutrinos, is
grossly unexpected, and perhaps, it would make more sense if they were electron
type neutrinos. Since two electron type neutrinos compose every electron
or positron. That is always! This is because every object in the
universe of greater mass than that of the electron is composed of positive and
negative electrons... including radio and light. All neutrinos of greater
mass than that of the electron type, are composed of equal numbers of positive
and negative electrons. This would make all neutral objects with a mass
greater than that of the electron type neutrino allegorical to the neutron, in
that while the neutron has no charge, it is also not a neutrino. Yet, the
decay mode for the above interaction is actually observed in a laboratory and
indeed one pion does give up one muon and one muon type neutrino. The
equations listed below illustrate the
problem.
IF:
(139573309.4 - 105667126.4) /200
= .169530915 MeV muon
neutrino
AND:
(139573309.4 - 105667126.4) /200 /9.1 * 10^32 /
2.99792458^2 /10^16 *
1.602187159 /10^19
= 3.321080132
THEN:
(139573309.4 - 105667126.4) /4000 /
2.99792458^2 /10^16 *
1.602187159 /10^19
= 1.51109146 /10^32 kg emu
HENCE:
(139573309.4 - 105667126.4) /4000 /9.1 * 10^6 /
2.99792458^2 /10^16 *
1.602187159 /10^19
= 1.660540066 /10^27 kg amu
SO:
3.321 * 9.1/10^32 kg / 20 / 9.1 * 10^6
= 1.6605 /10^27 kg 1/12 m (12C)
FINALLY: 20 *
1.511091462 /10^32 kg * 2.99792458^2 *
10^16 /1.602187159 *
10^19
= .1695309152 MeV muon neutrino
Since according to the above
reckoning, it
would take 4000 electronic
mass units to
equal the difference between
the MeV
charged pion and that of the
charged muon.
If we now extend two of the
equations above,
thus:
IF:
(139573309.4 - 105667126.4) /4 /10^3
2.99792458^2 /10^16 *
1.602187159 /10^19
= 1.51109146 /10^32 kg emu
THEN:
((139.5733094 - 105.6671264) /200 + 1)/ 10^3
= 1.169530915 /10^3 au
anomaly
We are then left with
something close to the
muon magnetic moment
anomaly. Interesting,
while close... but not quite
there yet!
IF:
20 * 1.511091462 /10^32 * 2.99792458^2 *10^16 /
1.602187159 *
10^19
= .1695309152 MeV muon neutrino
THEN: 20 *
1.511091462 /10^32
= 3.022182924 /10^31 kg muon neutrino
(bound)
SO:
20 * 1.511091462 /10^32 * 6.02213713 * 10^0
= 1.82 /10^30 kg free mass muon
neutrino
THEN: 20 *
1.511091462 /10^32 * 2.99792458^2 *10^16 /
1.602187159 * 10^19 *
6.02213713 * 10^0
= 1.020938419 MeV photon
(approx.)
OR:
3.321 * 9.1 /10^32 * 2.99792458^2 * 10^16 /
1.602187159 *
10^19
= .1695268245 MeV muon neutrino
ALSO: (2069
/18381* 10)^(1/2) * 1.602187159 /10^19 * 10^24 J^-1
T
= .1699843444 MeV muon neutrino
THEN: 2070
/18381 * 3/2
= .1689244328 MeV muon neutrino
(abstract)
AGAIN: (18382 /2069 *
2/3)^(1/2) /1.60287159 * 10^19 * 10^3 /
2.99792458^2 /10^16 meter^2
seconds^-2
= .1690113433 MeV muon neutrino
However, if it is found that
the muon type neutrino is
of a significantly greater
or lesser mass than this...
then it must be that the
heavier neutral object cannot
originate with the charged
pion as a quasi-stable
portion thereof, but rather,
it is a direct component in
the decay of a
nucleon. We are now in agreement
with the
anomaly.
IF:
1.1659244166 /10^3 muon anomaly
1986 CODATA
1.1659230(84) magnetic moment anomaly
THEN:
(1.1659244166/10^3-5^(1/2) /10^3 /2) /4 /2^(1/2) *
1.602187159 *
(1-2.99792458^2 /16.02187159)^(1/2)
= 8.987551783 c^2
HENCE:
((1.1659244166/10^3-5^(1/2)
/10^3 /2) * 16.02187159 /2^(1/2) *
6.626045764
/4)^(1/2)
= 2.997924579 c
IF:
18381 * 1.511091462 /10^32 * 6.02213713 *
10^0
= 1.672671 /10^27 kg free mass
proton
AND:
18406 * 1.511091462 /10^32 * 6.02213713 *
10^0
= 1.674946 /10^27 kg free mass
neutron
THEN:
2069 * 1.511091462 /10^32 * 6.02213713 *
10^0
= 1.882790 /10^28 kg free mass
muon
FINALLY: (18406-18380)
/2069
= 1.256645723 permeability (close
approximation)
The series of equations
above, suggests that the muon magnetic moment anomaly is directly related to the
proton radius and a percentage thereof. Since the anomaly has been
previously non-understood. It may now be be reckoned as a relationship of
the binding ratio for the electron loop clusters, which mediate the nuclear
interaction as part of the neutron-proton symmetry, where half of the pion 2:1
binding ratio is easily illustrated. This must be where the Guage Theory
and the quantum interpretation of the actual particle masses part
ways.
From this, one would have to
wonder, which came first... the chicken or the egg? The shell of hydrogen,
or the nucleus. In the case of who made who... I would have to tip my hat
to the egg. Because the proton is composed of electronic charges... which
are far more fundamental than any atom, that is there are no charge layered
domains, other than the configuration of the proton itself, and therefore,
making the proton less complex with fewer component parts than the hydrogen atom
as a whole. Thus the proton's stability. This would also indicate
that the neutron was formed first, because of its lack of a twist. The
presence of which would indicate the forming of a higher order of aggregate
matter. Since to get the twist at a magnitude equivalent to that of the
proton, bodies of a greater order than the atom itself, would probably have to
be connected through a filament of positive and negative electronic charged
string and be involved in some type of mutual orbit or rotation. Something
along the order of neutron stars would do
nicely.
CHIRALITY
This may also strongly
indicate that the chiral orientation of positively charged objects, and
especially the dominate subspecies of the positron being right handed (by
definition); is handed down through the left handed or clockwise hierarchy of
the universe (by definition) as the charge neutral aggregate or clustering of
galaxy and their parent super-clusters. It may even be, that in some
galaxy-clusters, the positively charged objects are actually left handed.
This could support an argument that the super-clusters may somewhat represent
isolated sub-universes of their own within the Greater, and ultimately the Super
Universe according to the dominate handedness of their whirlpools. But
then... this is only a theory. Back to reality
Brian...
CORIOLIS
EFFECT
If the earths rotation upon
it's axis is taken into account during measurements of the spins of subatomic
particles, and this is known as the Coriolis effect. Whereby, most of the
laboratories which have historically carried out measurements on beta emissions
(electrons ejected from the atomic nucleus), have been located in the northern
hemisphere, and the predominant sub-species emitted in these studies, has been
the left-handed negative electron. I would have to wonder if new, more
modern measurements were made on the study of nuclear beta emissions, and these
were carried out south of the equator... wether or not the predominant
subspecies would now, instead, be the right handed negative electron. I
say this, instead of the right handed positron, because the nucleus has an
incremental charge of +1 within both hemispheres. Even though, one would
think, it should follow that the predominant lepton should be a positively
charged object. This may be because of the afore mentioned mechanism
discussed in the previous paragraphs above.
________________________________________
IF:
(2^(1/2) /1.1660399315 * 10^11)^(4/3) * 2^(1/2) /92380
*
5/pi / 2.99792458^2 /10^16
/8.854187818 * 10^12
= 18381 proton emu
count
OR:
(2^(1/2) /1.1659923558 * 10^11)^(4/3) * 2^(1/2) /92380
*
5/pi / 2.99792458^2 /10^16
/8.854187818 * 10^12
= 18382 proton emu binding
count
AND:
1.602187159 /2^(1/2) /2 /92380 * 2.99792458
= 1838.277189 U'e / U'N
SO:
(2^(1/2) /1.165953347 * 10^11)^(4/3) * 2^(1/2) /92380
/
2pi / 2.99792458^2 /10^16
/8.854187818 * 10^12
= 1838.282 U'e / U'N
1986 CODATA
1838.282
electron magnetic moment in
nuclear magnetons
IF:
((1.166075981/ 10^11 -
5^(1/2) /10^11 /2) * (pi/10^2)^2 )^(1/2)
= 2.177511098/ 10^8 Planck mass
(approx.)
AND:
(1.166075981/ 10^11
meter)^(3/2)
= 3.981899317 /10^17 meter sec.
R'P
SO:
(3.981899316 /10^17 /92380
/10^5 Pa * 2 /10^20 meter)^(1/2)
= 928.4770132 * 10^-26 J T^-1
1986 CODATA
928.47701(31)
OR:
(.1165583386 *
2^(1/2))^(3/4) * (9238/ 2)^(1/2) /
16.02187159
= 1.097373565 R
THEN:
(1.165627006
/10^11/2^(1/2))^(3/4) * 2 * 92380 * 10^20
= 8.987551788 10^16 meters^2 /sec^2
HENCE:
(1.165627006
/10^11/2^(1/2))^(3/4) * 2 * 92380 * 10^20 *
9.109388616
/10^31
= 8.187110914 /10^14 mc^2 E
THEN:
(11.65627006 /2^(1/2))^(3/4)
* (2 * 92380)^2
= 1.660540068 amu
The minor radius of the
ellipse during a harmonic
resonance of the proton
within the nucleus of the
hydrogen atom, may therefore
be reckoned as a
relationship between the
looped strings thus:
HENCE:
(1.165594390/ 10^11)^(3/2) * 10^16 * 92380/
2
= 18381 electron-positron
units
SO:
(1.165636665/ 10^11)^(3/2) * 10^16 * 92380/ 2
= 18382 electron-positron units
If we move to consider a
minor radius for the proton
ellipse-loop at a possible
minimum within a given
resonance:
THEN:
16.02187159 *
(11.65078122)^(3/2) * (1838.1/ 92380)^(1/2)
= 2.99792458^2
If the proton loop's major
radius is considered to be
at some theoretical maximum
for a stable vibration,
which in all probability
could be much greater than
the value listed below and
therefore, much more
deformed and
unstable:
THEN:
(1.165911745/ 10^11)^2 * 10^20/ meters *
3/ 4pi * 92380 * 10^5
Pa
= 2.99792458 * 10^8
If we adjust the electron
radius in the first equation
above. This is not
entirely arbitrary. And we apply
a simple geometric relation
for the Lorentz
Transformation, using the
proton radius from
equation 6 in the numerator
and multiply this by the
square root of 2,
thus:
SO:
(2.817937823/ 10^15 meter * 18382 * 2^(1/2) /
2pi)
= 1.165894618 /10^11
THEN:
(1-1.165078122^2/ 1.165894618^2)^(1/2) *
2^(1/2)
= 5.291774491 Bohr
The final yield above for a
fraction of the Bohr Radius
in meters is truly
amazing. This cannot be a mere
coincidence.
9.284770131/ 9.274015431 *
(92380/1838.2)^(1/2) *
2.99792458^2
/1.602187159
= 3.981292623 period rotation
(9.284770131/ 9.274015431 *
(92380/1838.2)^(1/2) *
2.99792458^2
/1.602187159)^(2/3)
= 11.65957533 radius proton
(abstract)
If we consider that the
proton may absorb a photon,
that is one positive and one
negative electron as a
hard optical component
fitting into the loop and this
may increase the
circumference of the proton by
the prescribed amount in
units of electron during a
harmonic resonance.
With the magnetic string or
non-optical component being
fed into the shell of the
hydrogen atom, and then
re-emitted as light.
THEN:
2.81794092 /10^15 * 2^(1/2) * (18381+2) /2pi
= 1.165959325 /10^11 meter r'P
SO:
11.65959325^(3/2) * 1.602187159/ 2.99792458^2 *
(1838.2/
92380)^(1/2)
= 1.001161967 ue / uB
HENCE:
(2.81794092 * 2^(1/2) * 1838.3 /2pi)^(3/2) *
1.602187159 * 1.4106076147 /
2.99792458^2
= 1.001159252 ue / uB
1986 CODATA
1.001159652193(10)
FINALLY:
(r'P)^(3/2) * e * uP / c^2 = ue /
uB
AGAIN:
IF:
11.65957528^(3/2) * 1.602187159 /2.99792458^2 *
(1838.2/
92380)^(1/2)
= 1.001159652 ue / uB
1986 CODATA
1.001159652193(10)
THEN:
11.65957528^(3/2) * 1.602187159 /2.99792458^2 *
(1838.2/ 92380)^(1/2)
-1
= 1.159652632 /10^3 anomaly
Again, we are in full
agreement with the electron
magnetic moment anomaly as
being directly
related to the magnetic
moment and resonance
of the proton in its
relationship to the the shell of
the hydrogen
atom.
Back to the (not entirely
arbitrary) reduction in the electron radius. If the centrifugal-shape
shifting hypothesis for the material radius of the neutrino is valid, and that
this is acting as the primary agency for the radial extension of the
electron. That is, the two neutrino parts form four bulbous teardrops from
their masses being thrown out to the ends, as they counter rotate about a common
center of gravity, so-to-speak. Then the reduced radial measurement given
above, would represent the point of contact on the rotating neutrino arms, at a
position just below the bulb of the neutrino's tip, indicating the somewhat
precise location (in meters) on those radial arms for the average permeability
of charge between the electron and positron, as they grab one another during
their exchange. Hence, the equation listed below, with a yield for the
magnetic moment, as proof for the material radius of the electron acting as the
primary agency of charge in quantum
mechanics.
HENCE:
(2.81794092 /10^15 - 2.817937823 /10^15) *
2.99792458 * 10^8 /10^16
meters * 10^5 Pa
= 928.4572424 /10^26 U'e
1986 CODATA
928.47701(31)
OR:
928.4770131 /2.99792458 /10^8 + 2.817937823
= 2.81794092 re
AGAIN:
928.4770131/ 2.4263 * 4pi /16.02187159 /
2.99792458
= 1.001157885 ue / uB
1986 CODATA
1.001159652193(10)
SO:
(1-2.817937823325^2 /2.81794092^2)^(1/2) *
2.99792458 *
9pi
= 4pi permeability
ALSO:
101325 * pi^3 * (3 * 92380/ 18380)^2
/2^(1/2)
= 5.05078223 u'N
1986 CODATA
5.0507866(17)
The neutron equivalent to
the shielded proton
magnetic moment without
charge becomes:
IF:
(6.626045764/ 2^(1/2) * 18406/
92380)^(1/2)
= .9661853465 U'n
THEN:
.9661853464^2 * 92380/ 18406 *
2^(1/2)
= 6.626045763 h
For the neutron equivalent
to the proton magnetic
moment without charge
then:
THEN:
(6.626045764/ 2^(1/2) * 18408/
92380)^(1/2)
= .966237838 U'n
1986 CODATA
.9662370740
If we move to consider that
the quantum of angular
momentum, being a quotient
of Planck's Constant
divided by 2pi, resides as a
vector measurement in
relation to the
circumference of a circle. And, that,
the equation for the
circumference of a circle is equal
to 2pi r. Then it must
be that, just as the electron
distance across the diameter
of the sine wave, the
Planck Constant is also
related to the great circle of
the sine
wave.
The equation immediately
above may be rewritten
thus:
IF:
2pi * 1.054567937
= 6.626045674 h Planck
Constant
THEN:
(2pi * 1.054567937/ 2^(1/2) * 18408/
92380)^(1/2)
= .966237838 U'n
So the main components
present in the above
equation are also present in
the equation below as
the number of times the
hoola-hoop of electron-
positron string makes a
revolution in relation to the
Bohr
radius.
IF:
92380 * 2^(1/2) /2pi * 2.81794092/ 10^15/
5.29177249 *
10^11
= 1.107245201 times
HENCE:
(1838.1/ 92380)^(1/2)
= 1.410573071 U'p
1986 CODATA
1.41057138(47)
SO: (1/2
*10^-5 Pa * 18381/ 92380^2/ 6.02213713/
10^23/ 2.99792458^2/
10^16)^(1/2)
= 1.410573071/10^26 J T^-1 U'p exact
Since the Lorentz
Transformation is really another
way of saying that the
equation for the ellipse of
rotation is applicable to
the Planck Constant yielded
from the square root of the
values-devoid of
magnitude, for (the charge
of the electron as divided
into the speed of light
squared and then subtracted
from one). We are able
to more discernibly reckon
the structure of the great
circle of the sine wave
associated with the Planck
Constant as the
consequence of a material
geometry and an elliptical
portion
thereof.
IF:
(1-2.99792458^2/ 16.02187159)^(1/2)
= 6.626045764 h Planck
THEN:
6.626045764/ 2.99792458/ 9.109388428
= 2.4263 DeBroglie wave electron
And we have come full
circle... or rather, full elliptical
oscillation, heh,
heh!
The constant for Planck,
represented above as the
value devoid of magnitude,
is present in the equation
for the equivalent of the
magnetic moment for the
neutron. Since the
neutron, in reality, has no
charge... then, the moment
must be a secondary or
indirect measurement in
relation to that of the proton.
We find in the foot notes
for the 1986 CODATA listing
for the Fundamental
Constants of Physics, that,
quoting:
"The scalar magnitude of the
neutron moment is
listed here. The
neutron magnetic dipole is directed
oppositely to that of the
proton, and corresponds
to the dipole associated
with a spinning negative
charge distribution.
The vector sum, U'd = U'p + U'n,
is approximately
satisfied."
IF:
(1838.2 * 2.4263)^(1/3) * 2/ 3
= 1.097373565 Rydberg
constant
1986 CODATA
1.0973731534(13)
THEN:
(1-1.097373565/ 1.166016139)^(1/2)
= 2.4263 lambda electron
So it must be that the
maximum, stable, major radius
for the proton during an
oscillation, lies somewhere
within the range of 1.166/
10^11 meter
IF:
(1.1660808602/10^11)^(3/4) *
(2/ 10^20 /92380 /10^5
Pa)^(1/2)
= 928.4799271 /10^26 J T^-1
THEN:
((1838.2 * 2.4263)^(1/3) * 2 /1.097373565 *
92380/ 18380)^2 /2^(1/2) *
101325 * pi^3
= 5.050782233 u'N
OR:
(1.1660808602 /10^11)^(3/2)
* (92380 /1838.2 /2)^(1/2) *
2.99792458^2 * pi
/2
= 2.81794092 /10^15 meter re
SO:
(1.0011619675 * 2.99792458^2
* 10^16/ 1.602187159 *
10^19 *
(92380/18382)^(1/2))^(2/3) /18383 /10^35 /
2^(1/2) *
2pi
= 2.81794092 /10^15 meter re
FINALLY:
(1.001160317 * 2.99792458^2
* 10^16/ 1.602187159 *
10^19 *
(92380/18382)^(1/2))^(2/3) /18383 /10^35 /
2^(1/2) *
2pi
= 2.817937823 /10^15 meter p're
permeable radius
electron
We see in the equations
below, that the proton
magnetic moment in Bohr
magnetons... is a
constant which may be
related to the shell of
the hydrogen atom in water,
as the primary source
for that value, and exists
as allegorical to that
of the anomalies for the
electron and muon
magnetic moments. This
may be represented as
the square root of the
resonance of hydrogen in
meters sec. divided by the
number of charged
units composing the proton
minus one, in it's
exchange with the shell of
the hydrogen atom.
If it was originally
discovered in this way, the
etymology may actually look
something like this.
For
Example:
IF:
92380 * 2^(1/2) *
2.81794092 /10^15 /2pi
= 5.859289696 /10^11 meters radius
hydrogen
AND:
(92380 * 2^(1/2) *
2.81794092 /10^15 /2pi)^(3/2)
= 4.485051730 /10^16 meter sec. resonance
H
AND:
(92380 * 2^(1/2) *
2.81794092 /10^15 /2pi)^(3/4) /18382 * 10^12
= 1.1521020953 magnetic moment
anomaly
THEN:
(92380 * 2^(1/2) *
2.81794092 /10^15 /2pi)^(3/4) /18382 * 10^12
-1
= .1521020953 proton moment Bohr
magnetons
1986 CODATA
1.521032202(15)
IF:
(1838.2 /92380)^(1/2)
= 1.410611441 proton magnetic
moment
THEN:
(1838.2 /92380)^(1/2) /
((92380 * 2^(1/2) *
2.81794092 /10^15 /2pi)^(3/4) /18382 * 10^12
-1)
= 927.4109197 u'B
HENCE:
1.4106076147 /
((92380 * 2^(1/2) *
2.81794092 /10^15 /2pi)^(3/4) /18382 * 10^12
-1)
= 9.274084041 u'B
1986 CODATA
9.2740154(31)
LAST:
(1-1.1596543341 /1.1659244166)^(1/2) * pi * 3/2 *
(1-2.4263
/9.80665)^(1/2)
= 2.997924574 c (approx.)
Because of this, we may now
clearly understand
the origin of all of the
anomalies as being directly
related to the number of
electron/positron units
which comprise the shared
objects. No kidding!
ELEVENMORELAST:
2pi * (1-2.8179211112
/2.81794079328)^(1/2) /10^20 meter /10^5 Pa
= 1.6605404400 /10^27 kg amu
2^(1/2) /10^10 /(18382 *
2.8179211112 /10^15 * 2^(1/2) /2 /pi)^(3/4)
= .02241415941 molar volume
(5.2917739297 /10^11 -
((92380-18382/2) * 2.81794092 /10^15 *
2^(1/2) /2pi))^(3/2) /2pi *
10^25
= 96485.31222 Faraday
constant
18380 * 1.511091462 /10^32
/2.99792458^2 /10^16 * 4/3 /pi /2^(1/2) *
10^27 /10^5
Pa
= 9.274034753 /10^24 J T^-1 Bohr
magneton
(92382 * 2.8179401385 /10^15
* 2^(1/2) /2pi)^3 * 6.02213713 * 10^0 *
3^2 / 1.660540068 * 10^27 *
4 * 92380 /10^15 meter
= 2.4263 /10^12 meter lambda
electron
(2 * 2.81794092 *
91.09388427)^(3/2) * 3^3 /2.99792458^3
= 1.16567721 radius proton
(abstract)
(10^5 * 9.1^2 /4 * 18384
/92380)^(1/8) /pi
= 1.6021778866 Coulomb (abstract)
(10^5 * 9.1^2 /4 * 18384
/92380)^(1/4) /pi^2 /9.109388616
= 2.817943209 r'e
(abstract)
(1- 2.4263/
2.817942023)^(1/2) /89 * 3/4
= pi
(10- 92380 /18380 * 2/3
/2.99792458^2) * 2.81794092^(1/2) /
1.602187159
/6.02213713
= 1.67494721 free mass neutron
(abstract)
(10^-5 Pa * 10^-27 kg *
1.235595178 * 10^20 /4pi * 10^7 *
1.660540068 /10^27 /2 /92380
/10^23)^(1/6)
= 6.673975752 /10^11 G
I've added this last set of
equations because of the
similarities in the various
values for the muon and
proton in relation to that
of the electron. Since the
Thomson cross section can be
reckoned from a
simple geometric formula...
it should be possible
that other constants also
can be wrought from
simple geometric
relationships. For example:
IF:
(8pi /3)
r'e^2
= .66524616(18) * 10^-28
THEN:
(3^2/8) * 18381 /10^19 = 2.0678625 * 10^-15
Wb
1986 CODATA
2.06783461(61) magnetic flux
quantum
SO:
muon-electron mass ratio =
206.768262(30) mu/me
HENCE:
(3^2/8) * 4.548394458 /10^32 * 2.99792458^2 * 10^16
/
3^2 * 10^5 * 10^16
meters
= .5109866343 MeV electron
OR:
6pi^5 /2 * 3^2 /2.99792458^2 /(8pi/3)
= 1.097370085 Rydberg
WHERE: 6pi^5
= 1836.118109 mP/me
(approx.)
SO:
(1-2.42631 * 18382 /92380)^(1/2) /2pi /2^(1/2) /10^15
*
2.99792458^2 * 10^16 * 9.1
/999 /10^32
= 6.626048057 /10^34 J s
h
AND:
((1- 2.4263093221
/2.81794092)/(1+ 2.4263093221 /2.81794092))^(1/2) /
3 *
999
= 91 bound mol me
(abstract)
THEN: (3^3
+ 4^3)
/999
= 9.1091091091 me
(abstract)
OR:
91^(1/2) *
3/pi
= 9.109448359 me
(abstract)
HENCE: 6pi^5 * 91^(1/2) *
3/pi =
1.672602309 mp
(abstract)
AND:
6pi^2 * 2^(1/2) *
2
= 1.674927408 mn
(abstract)
THEN:
2pi * 2.99792458 * 18406 /2070
= 1.674902935 mn
(abstract)
OR:
2pi * 91^(1/2) * 2^(1/2) * 2 /3^2 * 18406
/2070
= 1.674912489 mn
(abstract)
SO:
(2pi * 91^(1/2) * 2^(1/2) * 2 /3^2 /2070 /6.02213713 * 9.80665 *
10)^(1/3)
= 5.291769425 Bohr (abstract)
THEN:
91 * 3^4 * pi /2 /2^(1/2) /16.02177219
= .5109998093 MeV (abstract)
FINALLY:
4 * 91^(1/2) * 3/pi * 91^18
= 6.672631345 G
(abstract)
Last but not least, when we
take the relative velocity of the isolated electron as coming close, but never
reaching the speed of light. Then the relationship to acceleration due to
gravity may be represented as an incremental graduation of two electronic units
per step. This may also represent the minimum energy transition for the
light photon to be emitted from the atom. For
example:
IF:
(1-2.9979215467^2 /9.80665)^(1/2) /(1838.2 /92380)^(1/2)
*
2.99792458^4 * pi /2
/2^(1/2) * 10^2
= 18282 units electron
SO:
(1-2.9979215267^2 /9.80665)^(1/2) /(1838.0 /92380)^(1/2)
*
2.99792458^4 * pi /2
/2^(1/2) * 10^2
= 18383 units electron
THEN:
(1-2.9979215267^2 /9.80665)^(1/2) /(1838.4 /92380)^(1/2)
*
2.99792458^4 * pi /2
/2^(1/2) * 10^2
= 18381 units electron
RUTHERFORD'S
DISCOVERY
On Wikipedia, it list's the
results of Rutherford's gold foil experiment as a nucleus of 100 units at 10^-14
meter, without the equivalent to the radius of a single electron at one unit of
10^-15 meters... I've seen Rutherford's original notes, and he does
indeed list the results as within both magnitudes, with the later being written
first as the result of a direct measurement, and he does mentioned it again
within both venues in a copy of his follow-up paper listed on the web at the
second click-on below. This is an important view to consider, first
because, for the proton to exist as being squarely within the range for the
radius of the electron (or slightly smaller), and at the same time, for the
proton to be at least 1830 times more massive than it's more fundamental
counterpart; which is also acknowledged by Rutherford... there must be something
more to consider in the measurements for the deflections of alpha particles off
the nucleus of gold atoms, than has previously been recognized.
Furthermore, I see no reason to consider Rutherford's measurements or his
technique as in error. If this is true, and I know that it is, then this
is very interesting indeed.
In conclusion: The
practical application of this knowledge has many forms which have already been
in use within medicine, communications, transportation, and weapons manufacture
as well as unknown applications in all of the above. For example:
The proton is in the least restrained state within the hydrogen atom than it is
within other heavier elements, and this is due to the fact that a single atom of
hydrogen is also the simplest, with a single proton being surrounded by the
least number of electron-positron units comprising the primary orbital or
shell. In consequence, the hydrogen atom is, therefore, much more
volatile as a reactant. It's light weight and transparency are also the
result of this simple configuration... which makes the hydrogen atom as a
component of the water molecule an excellent recipient for deuterium enrichment
(heavy water). Since heavier atoms may theoretically have protons which
are of a much greater number and therefore more restrained configuration... that
is the proton and neutron loops within the nuclei of these atoms, may be coiled
much more (tightly) and have more coils as a result. The net effect of
this, is that when the nuclei of these heavier atoms are knocked out, the
released tension in these (nucleon springs) may be so great as to cause wide
spread tearing of the elemental fabric. i.e. an atomic reaction.
That nuclear reactions may be made to occur is not new knowledge. That the
precise reason why this great amount of energy is released by a chain reaction
occurring as the result of liberating the nucleons and striking one another, has
never been considered as the result of nuclear compression in this way.
That is at this definitive of a scale through the greater tightening of the
electron-positron coils which make up the composition and configuration of the
atom and it's nucleus. This may explain why the atomic diameters of gas
atoms as reckoned by the (mean free path) appear to get smaller the further one
moves to the right in the Table of the Elements, even though the number of
shells and atomic numbers increase. Which leads us to the primary
mechanism for energy transitions in the photo-photo and photo-electric
effects. The greater number of electron-positron units, and therefore,
windings present in the shells of heavier atoms in some cases results in a
greater participation rate in the stimulated absorption and emission of
radiation in those atoms. Which in turn will lead to a greater variety or
discrimination of frequency range within those domains. Furthermore, The
more layers or shells that there are, which comprise heavier atoms, the more
these layers will squeeze the nucleus of those atoms. Since the greater
diameters will equate to a greater circumference. The number of
participating units of electrons and positrons may also increase... although not
necessarily incrementally for every shell.
Signed: Brian S. McMillan,
Copyright 1997-2007
________________________________________
EINSTEIN, PODOLSKY, ROSEN
FORMAT
EXPERIMENTATION
A brief abstract of an EPR
experiment that was performed by Alan Aspect and Team at the Institute of Optics
in Paris, France in the early 1980's is given below and is by no means
complete. I merely wrote this work as a means of describing the role and
specific mechanism of the photo-photo or optical version of the photo-electric
effect (since light is really composed of electrons) in the electronic or
optical absorption and emission of light during the EPR experimental
process. This brief was written as a follow-up work by myself in the
mid-90's and was intended as an addition to a 1992 paper titled: The Theoretical
Structure of the Photon by Brian S. McMillan.
EPR and Quantum Correlation
Through Hidden
Variables-The Photo-Electric
Effect
by Brian S.
McMillan
The physical mechanism or
gamma residual effect of linear electron string connecting the light photon with
the atom of emission (in this case calcium), is predetermined by the electronic
structure or configuration of all atoms in connection with the nature and
structure of light. The light photon itself is composed of two electrons,
one positive and one negative electron for a total of zero charge. With
the alternating positive and negative electron beam or string in the light
photons wake, and emitted from the shell of a specific atom which said shell or
web of positive and negative electrons encloses the nucleus, of which said
nucleus is composed of protons and neutrons, which are also composed of positive
and negative electrons... matter and
anti-matter.
By causing an upward and
downward transition in a specific shell of an atom through the application of
monochromatic laser light, the specific shell of an atom absorbs the electrons
associated with the incoming photon, pushing the web or shell outward against
the next layer or shell of electrons, which resist according to their individual
binding energies and collective to their number or count for that shell.
They then force the inner shell which absorbed the photon, to snap back and emit
light. This is the photo-electric
effect.
The polarization of light
may be exploited to determine the presence of the electron beam, however, the
polarization of the light photon is independent of the mechanism by which the
kinetic signal is sent or travels through the connecting beam of
electrons. Polarization of light is enough to predetermine the path that
the photon takes through a prism or polarizer separated by any distance, and the
distance of separation is also independent of the connecting electron
beam.
The above model for the
propagation of light in the resulting EPR effect, therefore, brings into
question the proposed conditions for the hidden variables model from the
standpoint of locality vs non-locality. In other words, the magnetic,
positive-negative electron filament in the wake of all optical radiation is
acting homogeneously as a kinetic agent from the moment of proximate emissions,
to the moment of distant absorption.
This also answers the
question: Where is all the anti-matter in the universe? Since the
positron is the only true form of anti-matter, and there is virtually one
positive electron for every negative electron in the universe.
Furthermore, since all matter of greater mass than the electron is composed of
positive and negative electrons, that is atoms and their nuclei, common
magnetism, even electromagnetic Gravity II, light, radio, and Black Holes.
There it is... all of it!
Brian S. McMillan Copyright
1992-1996
________________________________________
L.S. BARTELL'S
IMAGE
From a book titled "Beyond
Vision" by Jon Darius, pp. 158-159, subtitled "The Microscopic Frontier".
The upper images of the argon atom on page 159 are reviewed by myself as
follows: Using a two stage holographic microscope, L.S Bartell in 1975 at
the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, succeeded in doing what most persons in
the history of science have only dreamed of. The image shown just above,
and in between the angstrom forks, is the one of particular interest. The
literary source that first brought this to my attention was a book titled
"BEYOND VISION" by Jon Darius, pp. 158-159, quoting: "The inner fine
structure results from instrumental diffraction effects and does not pretend to
portray electrons whirling in orbit."
While, the largest image
located at the upper far right of the page cannot be differentiated from
"instrumental diffraction effects" because the border lines appear to be layered
just like those present in a interference fringe. The atom, as imaged,
just to the left of the largest one described above and just on top, and in
between the scaling unit of the angstrom forks, tells a different story.
The angular crossing of the woven thread like feature, clearly shown bordering
the left hemisphere of the central object, reliably argues against "instrumental
diffraction" as the source of the image.
Bartell actually succeeded
in resolving the woven basket like filaments, or strings of alternating positive
and negative electrons, composing the inner fine structure of the 3s shell of
the argon atom... and no one knew it!
Brian S. McMillan, except
quotes, Copyright 1990-1992
Rutherford's Gold Foil
Experiment on Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold_foil_experiment
Rutherford's 1914 follow-up
paper, titled "The
Structure of the Atom"
see: Dimensions and
Constitution of the Nucleus,
Ref: 494
http://dbhs.wvusd.k12.ca.us/webdocs/Chem-History/Rutherford-1914.html
Each of the click-on's below
represents a more
comprehensive version of the
work listed above +
mathematics. Thank
You.
http://www.godkings.com/physics.txt
http://www.godkings.com/quasar.txt
http://www.godkings.com/gravity.txt
http://www.godkings.com/raser.txt
http://www.godkings.com/fermat_theorem.txt
http://www.godkings.com/pseudoprime.txt
http://www.godkings.com/radiogravity2.txt
________________________________________
The brief abstract, listed
immediately below, was
instrumental in all the
research that I have done over
the last 25 years, and is
intended as a point of
reference to anyone that
might be interested in a
serious review of my
work. I have found that the
conclusions that I have
drawn are as valid today as
they were in 1979 when I
first began to seriously
explore physical
science. Thank You.
________________________________________
CARL D. ANDERSON and SETH
NEDDERMEYER'S
DISCOVERY of the
MUON
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_David_Anderson
________________________________________
CARL D. ANDERSON'S DISCOVERY
of the POSITRON
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Cloud_chamber_-_visible_trace_of_positron.JPG
The image in the click-on
above, is inverted or upside down, however, it is
superior to the lecture
images below... it is considered to be the
discovery
image. Since,
Professor Anderson, first became aware of the
significance
of the object shown, because
of the narrower curve of bubbles and shorthand
path from a recoiled
positron as it came back upward through the
barrier.
Nobel
Lecture
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1936/anderson-lecture.pdf
After careful review of the
experimental results published by Carl D. Anderson, on his epochal discovery in
1932, titled "The PRODUCTION and PROPERTIES of POSITRONS" "Nobel lecture
presented at Stockholm December 12, 1936." It was determined in 1979 by
J.D.S. and the author, that the sign or charge assignment for the electron,
being devised by nature through it's total relative spin or handedness, was
directly due to mechanical means. That is through the physical rotation of
a material radius. This was shown to be an accurate assessment, given the
curvature of the trajectory for particles of opposing charge within an
externally applied magnetic field, being exactly opposite in direction for each
emerging particle, after ploughing through a lead barrier within the Wilson
Cloud Chamber apparatus, hence, revealing the positive and negative electron
structure of the primary cosmic-ray beam.
That the positive or
negative electron was clearly shown to exist in nature as a single independent
object or body in possession of a unit charge, and not as a wave form, was
exemplified in the Wilson cloud chamber experiments performed by Carl D.
Anderson in 1932. Contrary to the conclusions that have been drawn from
other experiments that have been performed during the 20th century such as the
"Slit Double-Slit" experiment, where interference fringes can be seen as
projected on a screen immediately behind the slit like openings where the
electrons have passed, must be due to multiplicity through ionized diffraction
within the wall of the barrier and not shown to be a property inherent in the
electron itself. The hierarchy for the natural state of the electron as an
isolated quantum object and not as a wave like structure, can be easily seen in
the bubble trails that these objects leave in their wake during their passage
through water vapor. Because these ion trails clearly show that the
electrons are slowing down after emerging from the barrier, as they diminish in
their energy upon passing through an externally applied magnetic field, by
leaving a narrower curve of bubbles in their path, while losing momentum... any
allusion to a wave like nature for the electron is, of course, forever ruled out
by the cloud chamber results. With this knowledge, a simple conclusion may
be made concerning the origin, structure, and scope for the charge of the
electron.
That this characteristic
known as charge, must exist as an inherent property of the electron, and not
simply as a variation on a theme in the existence of material objects, means
that the positive or negative charge may not exist as a property which is
separate from the electron itself, and may only be present where electrons are
present. In other words, the property of charge is truly fundamental to
the electron, and therefore, cannot exist as a fundamental property associated
with the scope of a field, material agent, or body of a greater or lesser
magnitude than the electron itself.
This also establishes an
observation for the classification of what may actually constitute a wave
form. A wave may not exist as an isolated object, and may only be such
that it is a group or population of more than one object, when such a group of
objects are behaving as a collective reference frame in the rhythmic
transference of momentum through kinetic energy. A wave may be such that
it is observed as a particular property associated with the period of motion of
an object or that objects extension, and not found to be an inherent condition
for the natural state of that object. For example: When we observe a
wave moving on water, we are actually observing a collection of water molecules
as they are colliding in a rhythmic dance of cohesion, and sharing in the
transfer of kinetic energy as a densely populated group. When we pluck a
guitar string, we are seeing the sound that it makes with our ears, as the
transfer of kinetic energy through an induced stress in the cohesion between the
molecules of the string as it vibrates along it's length, and is amplified by
the collision of the molecules of air and the resonating cavity to which the
string is attached. When a sine wave may be measured as a periodicity
associated with radiation or even a standing wave; it is a particular dimension
of that object which is rotating as an armature or even a collection of objects
which are rhythmically vibrating and sharing in a tension between themselves and
some outside force of kinetic energy. This means that a wave CANNOT exist
as a natural, isolated property or condition associated with single objects,
except as an artifact, and may only be observed in relation to quanta as a
shared characteristic. That is, as an observable which is dependent upon
the collective behavior of a group or
population.
Because the electron has
been shown to exist as a body with two opposing charges, but with identical
masses, and these charges have been shown to be differentiated by oppositely
curved and diminishing pathways in a magnetic field, the electron itself must be
spinning around with something like english on a cue ball. For the
positive electron to curve with an opposite aspect, it must be spinning in the
opposite direction. For the electron to be in possession of a
characteristic which demonstrates that it can be found in two subspecies... that
is a left and right handed negative charge type as well as a left and right
handed positive charge type, the electron must therefore consist of a
composition of two sub-components. Since the neutrino has been shown to
exist as a neutral object in possession of a mass which is less than that of the
positive or negative electron, and the neutrino may never occur as a charged
object... hence it's name; "little neutral one", the neutrino would be an
excellent candidate for the structural unit comprising the electron and,
possibly making the neutrino the most fundamental building block or independent
object in the universe. That the neutrino is shown to exhibit the highest
penetration as well as the lowest rate of interaction with other objects in any
environment what-so-ever, must be attributable to a property which is not only
related to its small mass, but also to the scope and extension of its material
radius in association with this small mass.
While all neutral objects of
greater mass than that of the neutrino, such as the neutral meson or even the
neutron itself, cannot be made to bend in a magnetic field even though these
objects are all composed of positive and negative electrons, must mean that the
property of charge associated with the electron also contributes to its ability
to ionize H2O into its more elemental gaseous components. The material
radius of the electron, for example, is literally tearing the molecules apart on
its passage through the water vapor. This property of radial friction,
which is obviously at the heart of the high rate of production of bubbles within
the cloud chamber, must also be responsible for the electrons reaction to the
applied magnetic field as the electron rotates on its axis and is seen to curve
in its pathway through the field lines. It is ironic that these magnetic
field lines, and in fact all magnetic fields, are also composed of positive and
negative electrons. Only these are configured as charge neutral filaments
or strings, while the positive and negative charges which make up these fields
are in fact engaged in a frictional exchange of kinetic energy, and therefore
their electronic radial extensions are occupied. It may also be a fact
that whenever magnetic field lines exist as extended objects from atoms, as in
the case of a permanent or electronic magnet, that the natural environment for
the existence of these field lines dictates or somewhat limits their relative
velocities in relation to the smaller and therefore faster projectiles of, lets
say, radiation. That is to say that the smaller and faster projectiles
cross the field lines, and not the other way around. Which is why, for
example, we don't see strong atmospheric ionization present in the vicinity of
loadstone. This process of ionization would also go relatively unnoticed
at the earths poles were it not for the action of the solar wind. Now it
may seem rather unscientific of me to say that the size of the objects dictates
anything at all as a fundamental principle. However, please remember, it
is also a well known fact that when a small gear meets a larger gear... it is
the small gear which rotates at a faster rate to that of the big gear.
While this may, at first glance, seem to be somewhat naive or oversimplified on
my part... it is precisely how mechanics really
work.
Since the proton's single
positive charge is due to the presence of one more positron than the remaining
equal number of positive and negative electrons, which comprise it's
looped-string. And which may only exist as a continuous structure based
upon a half twist, allowing the opposing charges to share in their chiral
continuity... therefore, results in the radial extensions of these individual
charges to be slightly splayed out, and tense, in the configuration along the
protons circumference. This is what gives the proton it's impetus to spin
in the direction that it does. Since this twist, like that of a Mobius
strip, is present in the configured string because of a 180 degree phase shift
as compensation in the orientation of the positive electron, it might just as
easily be confused for a right handed negative electron that has sharply
recoiled from a target, and therefore, may strongly present an argument against
the existence of anti-protons, which is exactly why we don't see
them.
This is also a good argument
in favor of the neutron being left-handed.... along with other neutral particles
such as neutrinos. This is because all neutral objects of greater mass
than the electron-type neutrino are composed of equal numbers of positive and
negative charges which form looped-strings without this mobius-like twist and
are, therefore, like a looped ribbon or tire rim with a definite inside and
outside. This is not to say that these looped objects can't flip-flop or
slowly rotate along the cross section of their minor radius. Nor am I
saying that there is a flat aspect to this string which would suggest that these
charge neutral loops would flip for this reason... for these structures possess
a cross section that is most certainly oval in the average rotation of its
integral electronic parts. All that I am saying, is that they may be able
to rotate or animate during a precession in their orientation along their
circumference. That subatomic particles of greater mass than that of the
negative electron, may also possess a negative charge, would be due to the
action of this mobius strip being flipped in the opposite direction because of
the presence of one more negative charge than a positive one. This may
also be why there are no stable subatomic particles with a mass greater than
that of the proton in possession of a positive charge. And that this would
obviously leave open the mechanical reality of rotational stress along the vast
distances of space, that these filaments travel as they are carried along by the
lights beam. This is certainly the case when the planets, which are
connected to the sun by these magnetic field lines, undergo very great amounts
of orbital rotations, and especially galaxies, which are forming gigantic
hurricanes or knotted whirlpools of these filaments, which in turn are
connecting these galaxies to their neighbors. These filaments of magnetic
gravity are not only subject to this rotational stress and act as a tensely
knotted rope, but they also begin to move these massive wheels of star stuff
together or apart along their rotational axis, as the tension is being increased
or decreased through the directed action of this twisting. This may
actually be the prime reason why the proton may exist in the first place.
Because of a snapping apart or breaking away of these twisted filaments at a
tolerance length for the electronic exchange of their integral parts to form the
mobius like loops of the positively charged objects. This may be why other
charged particles, which are of a significantly lesser mass than that of the
proton, are also so short lived or unstable. One of the few natural
exceptions would be the electron, since the positive or negative electron are
indeed the prototype for all higher order
matter.
This diatribe must end
sometime, at least for now. At some point in the near future, I will
publish a more comprehensive work on the composition of the neutrino and why we
may never be witness to its natural decomposition... hopefully. As well as
the nature of entropy, and why heat, momentum, and energy are all just different
labels for kinetics, and that these can never be shown to exist as an agency
which is completely independent of the interacting material
masses.
Brian S. McMillan Copyright
1979-1993
________________________________________
THE CORIOLIS EFFECT ON
OPTICAL AND RADIO TRANSMISSION
The speed of light is a very
elusive subject. While it is a common topic, it may be said to be a very
misunderstood one. I don't pretend to have all of the answers, but I might
present a decent argument or two, and I know that this will come as a surprise
to most... if not all of you. But keep in mind that this portion of my
narrative WILL open your eyes to the possibilities that are presented here, as I
am not a science writer and will need these notes to be smoothed out quite a
bit. If we attempt to keep a few grounded principles in mind through out
all of these notations and the accompanying verbatim, then it will be very easy
to grasp. The principals are but a few. If I have left any out...
then I will certainly add them later.
Thanks.
1. There is no such
thing as a mass-less object or property. Any thing or property that may be
associated with-or measured, including energy, must exist in 3-dimensions.
That is it must possess volume and therefore mass. It may not exist as a
dimensionless object or property.
2. There is no action
at a distance, without material intervention, or physical
agency.
3. There is no
time. The measure of time is in relation to the motion of matter in
space. Nothing more.
4. There is only three
measurable dimensions. Really... only one with six defined vectors.
While these may be treated as a single axis with three distinct orientations,
all revolving out of phase by 90 degrees, and coming round to the next
orientation which is 90 plus 90 degrees at a right angle to both the first and
second axis of rotation, and finally ending up with plus 90 degrees for a total
of 270 degrees of dynamic rotation and covering the equivalent of 360 degrees in
one plane. We may further treat the axis as having a dominant end which
further defines it's orientation... hence, the six vector. It will
ultimately take six out of phase rotations for an axis with a defined direction
or simple arrow at its tip to come back to its original starting point.
Since radians will do just as well as cartesian coordinates from a fixed three
axis, no further embellishment is necessary, except to say that for a dynamic
body, a three dimensionally fixed crystal lattice is not appropriate. But
for the sake of definition, I will stick with
three.
5. Matter or energy
can neither be created, nor destroyed, only changed. For atoms and
sub-atoms, this is known as mass-energy conservation. Where there is an
apparent violation of this principle in any given reaction, it is only our
ignorance of the reaction which is apparent, not the underlying principle.
This is because, our knowledge of the infinitely great is confused with regard
to the infinitely small. Since it may be reasoned that matter as quanta is
always going to be divisible into lesser bits, and we find that we may be
limited by our technology to discover this ultimately smallest quantum. It
may be safe to say, that, since nature has given us the electron as a currency
equivalent to the penny, then the neutrino is certainly equivalent to the metal
atoms which make up that penny. We can exploit these pennies by a chemical
reaction to yield the electricity which we exchange through the air as radio or
light, or even through the current in a wire. But as neutrinos go, we do
not currently utilize their signature, except in the determination of exploding
stars and emissions from our sun. While the neutrino may very well be
divisible into lesser components, it is not likely that we will succeed in
dividing it... at least not any time soon. Since the neutrino as it stands
today, possesses a behavior or property which is very penetrating. Since
our science, like nature, exploits the electro-magnetic properties of materials
which are ultimately composed of pennies, then this may limit our ability to
trap, contain, or measure anything smaller. It is amazing that we have
been able to get down to the neutrino in our measurements, even though it has
only been through secondary reactions that we have been able to do
so.
Z. Light and radio
waves, both propagate through all allowable media as well as free space, as a
collection of strings or filaments of positive and negative electrons.
Though apparently not affected by Gravity I or Inertia, light is affected by
Gravity II or electromagnetism... which is the same thing as light, interesting
concept, huh.
Za. All optical
emissions or light, mechanically propagates as a linear non-optical filament or
string of alternating positive-negative electrons (representing the magnetic
component), with a neutral electron-positron pair surmounting its tip
(representing the electronic optical component) while continuously remaining
connected to the atom of emission. In all frames of reference. This
last statement will be explained shortly.
Zb. All radio
emissions or conventional radio, mechanically propagate as a collection of
alternating electron-positron string or filaments, which pinch-off into
deformed, rotating loops of various sizes. And (may or may not) remain in
contact with it's counter-rotating neighbor until the signal is disrupted at the
source or suffers deflection in the interim. As a result, conventional
radio waves may be placed in an entirely different category than that of optical
emissions, even though they are both composed of positive and negative electron
filaments and they both travel at the speed of
light.
Optical emissions or light,
while apparently not affected by inertia, may be affected by the angular moment
of the source. Thus, the laser interferometer, or laser based gyroscope is
a common application of this principle. This is because the laser beam, or
all optical emissions for that matter, propagate as a linear string which remain
connected to the atom of emission. Therefore, the transmission axis of the
light beam, remains directional to the orientation of the source. If it
did not, then because the earth is rotating upon its axis, we could never use
the optical signal over great distances to reliably measure dimension; since the
light beam would then begin to curve in its emissions path in relation to the
earths rotation, or rather, the earth would continue to curve in its rotation
under the non-deviating optical pathway. So if light were to be emitted as
free radiation, then as the source continued to rotated, the optical component
would not rotate. And, in fact, it is the discrete susceptibility of the
optical components relatively narrow wavelength to the rotational movement
itself, and not necessarily to momentum, which allows the interferometric device
to operate. Optical emissions can be made to be coherent, while
conventional radio waves cannot. This is why there can never be a truly
coherent MASER. Microwaves are by nature, narrow radio waves, and because
of their short sine, they may be pumped into and down the column of an optical
LASER beam, where the interior refractive index of the coherent column will then
act as a wave guiding mirror; thereby, containing the microwave signal in step
within the column. Any conventional wave guide, which is suitable for
directing microwaves may be used, but only with considerable degradation to the
coherence of the microwave signal when two dimensional analogues are
applied. This is because the optical population of mono-chromatic light
acts coherently over a greater sustained distance than conventional microwave
guides and supplies better divergent correction for the microwave signal
itself. Because, remember, that even though microwaves are narrow radio
waves, they are still, after all only radio... and because of this, without
correction, they will quickly diverge as propagation of the signal
proceeds.
Over the years, I have often
considered that Louis De Broglie had introduced his famous wave equation in
order to account for his theoretical proposal of the "pilot wave" or "standing
wave", which he stated was to accompany the actual path of the electron in it's
journey around the nucleus of the atom. In fact the wave equation is
presented in most physics texts previous to AD 1960, as the De Broglie wave
equation. However, I have always treated this wave equation as applicable
to the forms of free radiation. What a concept, huh? Now I gave this
some thought, and came to the conclusion that the current defined value for the
mass of the electron, which was given in the De Broglie equation, was tailored
around the famous experiment and differential equation for the (charge to mass
ratio) introduced by Ernest T. Rutherford, whereby he had fashioned a better
vacuum tube to carry out his cathode ray experiments in order to determine the
nature of the electron as a particle or a wave, and later tweaked according to
the free emissions value for the Coulomb as measured by Robert A. Millikan in
his famous "oil droplet" experiment (pardon me if I leave out the history of
Pierre De Coulomb, for he is certainly the man). Rutherford found the
electron to be a particle. I won't elaborate on the later experiments
performed by Rutherford's son, where he "proved" that the electron has a
wave-like property, (for which he won the Nobel Prize); which I might add is
definitely an artifact of the experiment. Nor will I attempt to justify
the De Broglie Hypothesis in terms of an inherent wave-like nature for the
electron. Since the orbits of atoms are composed of strings or loops of
positive-negative electron string. Hence, the De Broglie Hypothesis is
correct, even if for a slightly different reason. However, it is
interesting to note that De Broglie said that the standing wave does vibrate
along the actual path of the electron. Indicating that he may have
recognized, albeit inadvertently, that the two structures were separate but
interdependent. Within this theory, I have found that they are the same,
because a wave-like nature may never be a natural inherent property of a single
object, thus the whole reason for this chapter in my dissertation. Please
note: That in the six Lorentz equations immediately below, the value for
the free emissions velocity of the electron (within the brackets) is below the
optical emissions velocity, while the value for the Coulomb, also (within the
brackets) of the first four equations is slightly above nominal. I mention
this, not only for the reason that the bound value for the Coulomb is greater
than the free emissions value, but also to point out that in the last two
equations, the classic Lorentz transformation replaces the position of the
Planck-Lorentz transformation represented in the first
four.
PLANCK-LORENTZ
TRANSFORMATION
WHERE: (1-
2.997913796201^2 /16.02187159)^(1/2)
= 6.626076216 h Planck constant
(abstract)
THEN:
(1- 2.997913796201^2 /16.02187159)^(1/2) /
2.99792458
/9.109389754
= 2.426310848 lambda electron
(abstract)
(slightly above nominal)
HENCE: (1-
2.997913796201^2 /16.02187159)^(1/2) /
2.426310848 *
2.99792458
= 8.187111216 mc^2 E
(abstract)
THEN:
(1- 2.997913796201^2 /16.02187159)^(1/2) /
2.426310848 * 2.99792458
/16.02177227
= .5109991004 MeV
(abstract)
MODIFIED
LORENTZ-TRANSFORMATION
ALSO:
(1- 2.997913796201^2 /2.997924579146^2)^(1/2) /
2^(1/2) *
2.997924579146^3
= .5109990257 MeV
(abstract)
FINALLY: (1-
2.997913796201^2 /2.997924579146^2)^(1/2) /
2^(1/2) * 2.997924579146 *
16.02177227
= 9.109388428 free mass electron
(abstract)
The free mass of the
electron as listed in the original De Broglie wave equation, is always given in
the divisor, underneath the Planck constant and multiplied by the speed of light
to yield the wavelength for the electron. Now I gave this some
thought. If free electrons can never reach the speed of light. How
is it that the speed of light in a vacuum is given in the (divisor) of the
equation. Answer: Because the mass of the electron is measured
across a potential, whereby the emission and absorption of the electron, is
mechanically identical to that for the optical emissions mechanism; namely the
electron-positron looped strings of the atoms themselves, which in reality, are
the origin for the actual photo-mechanical velocity. If the Planck
constant is directly proportional to the wavelength of the electron. And
this is also related to the measured mass and charge of the electron. And
in turn may be stated to be different proportions residing within two distinct
categories; the coupled or bound vs the free electron states. Then the
relationship may present itself as follows: This is only a tentative
relationship for the values, however, I hope that some of you will understand
right away where I am going with this.
IF:
(1- 2.997913796201^2
/16.02177227)^(1/2) /2.997913796201
/9.109388427
= 2.426310321 lambda electron
MODIFIED CLASSIC
LORENTZ-TRANSFORM
SO:
9.109388427 /(1-
2.997913796201^2 /2.997924579146^2)^(1/2) * 2^(1/2)
/16.02177227
= 299.7924579 **
In the above equation, if
the radian of the
hypotenuse is treated as the
speed of light,
then the minor leg of the
right triangle is
equal to the speed of light
divided by the
square root of 2. Or
the charge to mass
ratio is equal to the
(square root of 2 divided
by the Lorentz transform and
the speed of
light). Where have we
seen this relationship
before? Heh,
heh...
Altering the emissions
velocity (outside of
the brackets) that is, in
the divisor only:
THEN:
(1- 2.997913796201^2
/16.02177227)^(1/2) /2.997924579146
/9.109388427
= 2.426301594 lambda electron
(narrow)
Increasing the emissions
velocity to the
speed of light in both the
Lorentz coupling
and free
positions:
SO:
(1- 2.997924579146^2
/16.02177227)^(1/2) /2.997924579146
/9.109388427
= 2.426290443 lambda electron
(sub-emissions)
Maintaining the optical
emissions velocity
while increasing the Coulomb
in the divisor
within the Lorentz
transform.
HENCE:
(1- 2.997924579146^2
/16.02187159)^(1/2) /2.997924579146
/9.109388427
= 2.4263
lambda electron, bound (narrow)
Through the entire set of
equations above, the
free mass of the electron
has been maintained
at it's nominal value;
which according to the
Special Theory of
Relativity, would be impossible.
The only equation where the
free mass of the
electron is represented
within it's allowable
value is in the modified
classic Lorentz transform
at the second from the
top. ** Please note, that
I have introduced the square
root of 2 in the
numerator of the classic
equation to account for
the radian of the
hypotenuse, and almost like
magic the proper form of the
equation is
completed. This is
something that I had to try...
and IT
WORKED!
It didn't take any drastic
manipulation of the
values either, and believe
it or not, I began using
the value for the speed of
light in the upper set
of equations as its
currently accepted standard
of 2.99792458 out to nine
places. Now some
of you may find these
equations to be a bit dry
and complex. Or
appearing to depart from the
simplicity of most of the
work that I have presented.
But please bare with me on
this because, as you
can see while the values
appear to change, the
form of the equations do
not. They remain
fairly consistent, and
within the bounds of most
ordinary geometric
algebra.
Now this last set of
equations should, so-to-speak, bring it home to the reader. However, I
have attempted to maintain the relevance of the equations as well as their
yields, in order to fully illustrate the allowable values for the yields in
terms of the bound electronic state vs the free emissions state. And oddly
enough, I have found that this particular form of the equation represents the
cumulative wavelength for the interaction of molecules. That is, the
wavelength for the electron-positron string may be treated as it were, as a free
emissions value embedded within the molar standard. This is because the
interaction of molecules is, in reality, ultimately that interaction represented
through the clustering of atomic groups or compounded atoms. This is the
compounded molecular variant, not the nuclear one. For
example:
IF:
10^5 Pa * 10^19 *
(1- 2.4263096516
/2.817940920)(1- 2.99792458^2 /16.02177219) *
pi^2
= 6.02213713 10^23 NA Number
Avogadro
THEN:
10^11 meter /
((1- 2.4263096516
/2.817940920)(1- 2.99792458^2 /16.02177219) * pi^2 * 2 *
92380)^(1/2)
= 2.99792458 10^8 meter sec^-1
This first equation above is
the one that most closely resembles the free emissions standard for all of
the internally defined values, however, the external yield for (1- 2.99792458^2
/16.02177219)^(1/2) = 6.626019502 < h free, does not.
This is because, in reality, this equation is representative of the molecular
standard. So none of the values may ever be exactly as shown. Since
the format of the equations is correct through proof of their compounded and
individual yields. And, because of this, I know for a certainty that they
are. This presents a very interesting problem for the physicist, at least
in relation to the currently accepted International Standard. This is only
from the standpoint of the context used in defining these values, and in no way
implies that the values themselves have been corrupted or are necessarily
elusive. So as constants go, this indicates that we are dealing with
something a bit more flexible, when measured within different states or a
different context. This also means that as the Coulomb increases, the
emissions velocity must fall below that for the speed of light, and no radio or
light may be emitted. However, free radiation, such as nuclei or electrons
may be emitted. It should be pointed out again, that none of the values
remain static, as we are dealing with a dynamic natural system not an idealized
one. This also means that the measured value for the speed of light in a
vacuum, as already shown, is an integrated constant. More on this
later.
IF:
10^5 Pa * 10^19 *
(1- 2.4263034828
/2.817930150)(1- 2.99792458^2 /16.02187159) *
pi^2
= 6.02213713 10^23 NA Number
Avogadro
THEN:
10^11 meter /
((1- 2.4263034828
/2.817930150)(1- 2.99792458^2 /16.02187159) * p^2 * 2 *
92380)^(1/2)
= 2.99792458 10^8 meter sec^-1
SO:
(1- 2.99792458^2 /16.02187159)^(1/2)
= 6.626045764 Planck constant
(abstract)
HENCE:
6.626045764 /10^34 /2.99792458 /10^8 /2.4263034828 * 10^12
meter
= 9.109375541 /10^31 kg free mass
electron
This next set of equations
shown immediately above includes the most adoptable value based equation for the
bound to free emissions threshold standard. However, because the Planck
constant is approaching its free nominal value while the electron radius and
wavelength are moving toward their lower limits, which represents a higher
degree of permeability for the electronic components comprising the
electron-positron strings, this too is an unlikely scenario. However, it
should be noted that the free radiation mass for the electron is kept at a
nominal yield, when the values for the external constants are applied to the De
Broglie wave function. But again, remember that we are looking at a
molecular based packing standard for free radiation as well as optical
emissions. Not being one to yield to mediocrity, we will keep
going.
IF:
10^5 Pa * 10^19 *
(1- 2.4263105802
/2.817938393)(1-2.99792458^2 /16.02187159) *
pi^2
= 6.02213713 10^23 NA Number
Avogadro
THEN:
10^11 meter /
((1- 2.4263105802
/2.817938393)(1- 2.99792458^2 /16.02187159) * pi^2 * 2 *
92380)^(1/2)
= 2.99792458 10^8 meter
sec^-1
OR:
10^5 Pa * 10^19 *
(1- 2.4263105802
/2.817940920)(1- 2.99792458^2 /16.02180192) *
pi^2
= 6.02213713 10^23 NA Number
Avogadro
THEN:
10^11 meter /
((1- 2.4263105802
/2.817940920)(1- 2.99792458^2 /16.02180192) * pi^2 * 2 *
92380)^(1/2)
= 2.99792458 10^8 meter sec^-1
These last two equations
above, also suffer the same fate as the equation immediately before it.
Except this time it is not the lowering of the radius and wavelength values for
the electron, it is the raising of these values in relation to the Planck
constant, which makes it more extreme. But these are pretty close...
first, because all of the internal values which are used, remain true to the
1986 CODATA standard for the Fundamental Constants of Physics. Second, the
external yields also maintain very good
agreement.
IF:
10^5 Pa * 10^19 *
(1- 2.4263000000
/2.817926105)(1- 2.99792458^2 /16.02187159) *
pi^2
= 6.02213713 10^23 NA Number
Avogadro
THEN:
10^11 meter /
((1- 2.426300000
/2.817926105)(1- 2.99792458^2 /16.02187159) * pi^2 * 2 *
92380)^(1/2)
= 2.99792458 10^8 meter sec^-1
IF:
10^5 Pa * 10^19 *
(1- 2.426310238
/2.817940325)(1- 2.99792458^2 /16.02180737) *
pi^2
&
