Bigger Quarks in the mnp Model

The "loops of charge material of fixed length" model of particles that leads to charge quantization in the mnp Model also offer understanding of Strange, Charm, Bottom, and maybe Top. Wild and Over-the-Top, the mnp Model is an interesting means of interpreting experiment.

The mnp Loop Model image of Up has one loop of negative and five loops of positive as a strand with cross section:

 n p
p   p
 p p

This is limited to one form, while Down has two loops of positive and four loops of negative which leads to three possible patterns for the strand that coils

 p p    p n    p n
n   n  n   p  n   n
 n n    n n    n p

Three patterns seemed to offer three forms of the Down quark, which has been incompatible with the single down quark of experiment. I had rationalized earlier this week that the first is the most stable form, since the "others" would tend to migrate the two minority loops to be adjacent.

On focusing accidentally on the "bare mass" and "effective mass" of quarks on page 135 of Griffiths' Introduction to Elementary Particles Second, Revised Edition 2008, the following thoughts burst out:

Strange is not that big! So Strange is the third form of "down" and is somewhat stable, since the loops do not have a preferred direction for migrating. The second form might be seen briefly in accelerator experiments. I would consider it bigger and "heavier" than down, but probably not as big or "heavy" as strange. I call it d' or down' since the minority loops/filaments are separated by one majority loop. It would decay almost always to down, though with added energy might occasionally become strange. Strange (d'') has the minority loops separated by two of the majority strands hence the double prime. d'' is the third form:

 p n
n   n
 n p

Further, whatever is added to the first generation of quarks to form the "second generation" leads to Charm and Bottom! These are closer in mass and are the real second generation! Further, bottom might come in three versions, b, b' and b'' just as down comes in the three versions d, d', and d''. For b, if extra charge material loops are added between generations, the difference may be small compared to the mass of the b and the number of configurations large so statistical significance may be hard to achieve in differentiating the types. The error bars on the mass of b may just be irreducable.

Whatever is added to the second generation leads to Top t and Over_the_Top o, where o may come in three versions o, o', and o'' or perhaps many indistinguishable versions. Of course, it is possible that o is impossible. I do intend to use/hijack the wonderful work of quantum mechanics for that investigation. Certainly o would be high energy.

The "whatever is added" could be more loops/filaments of balanced charge, as in the first cross section picture of a muon as a coiling strand of 18 filament loops:

    n n
   n   n
    p p
 n p   p n
n   p p   n
 n n   n n

Charm might be:

    p n
   p   n
    p n
 p p   p p
n   p p   n
 n p   p n

It appears that the outer form, grafting ppnn onto three pairs in the inner ring in cross-section, creates an outer surface that looks like the anti-quark of opposite charge. Since the charge structure is actually overlapped as much as Separation will allow, that image of "outside surface" may be effectively chimerical.

"Whatever is added" could also be extra twisting of the loops over the surface to make a stiffer charge structure and hence a larger "sphere" with more opportunity to interact with and recruit the mediator entities.

Or "whatever is added" hasn't been imagined yet. To be continued.

The "anti" versions of these quarks would be reversals of n and p in the diagrams, but essentially similar.

Many questions remain unanswered in the mnp Model, both about big quarks and quark behavior. Is there something about the symmetry of 6 of a single charge that makes big quarks form or is it just that those particles "resonate" and last a little longer than loop collections that do not add up to a multiple of "elementary charge?" Can the quark triplets be forever changing loops but never getting to all of one type which would decay quickly?? Descriptions of quark behavior suggest the loops actually link quarks, so that stretching is resisted by coils that stretch, rather than just by "glue". The loops are always in the process of being exchanged, apparently, rather than being exchanged sequentially?

The Education Extends

On the Origin of Universes

How did our universe begin? Current descriptions of the Big Bang have many answers, but what are the questions?

Questions that can be raised in any theory (and some possible answers) include:

• When is the velocity of light, c, fixed? (initially, after initial expansion)
  
• When does uneven distribution occur? (initially, early in spherical expansion, after shell expands to initial radius, later?)
  
• When do larger baryons form? (early in order of descending size, when electrons, after loops, after electrons)
  
• When does the predominance of electrons, up, and down develop? (when leptons and baryons form, after electrons and protons, after leptons and baryons of "regular" and anti variety, as universe expanded and by region - though the counter argument is "we see no interface of high energy reactions")
  
• When does gravity start working as at present? (initially, after an expansion, after some “complete” expansion)
  
• How many universes as we know them exist? (none - its imaginary, one, an uncountable infinity are created constantly)
  
• When have the huge particles existed? (At the beginning, when created in the labs, when intelligence somewhere created them in labs, when intelligence somewhere created a fireworks show of organization for all to see) Pick all that apply.
  
• Can causation flow backwards in time? (No, don't know, not relevant, only from the origin and then the universe would be the same anyway, yes)
  

Questions that can be raised by any structural model include:

• When do the structural units appear? (initially, after some expansion, some other time)
  
• When do the structural units attain their present form? (initially, after initial expansion, constantly changing, other)
  
• Do the structural units change? (no, not since some early epoch, with age, in black holes, constantly, other)
  

Questions raised by the mnp Model, a structural model which sees everything consisting of three types of entities that differ only in “Axis” interacting in three ways over very short distances:

• When is the magnitude of the Axis effect set - earlier was phrased when is the amount of Spin set? (initially, later??)
  
• When is the direction of the Axis compared to direction of travel set? (initially, early, by the end of initial expansion, later??, whenever entities move)
  
• Did the basic entities expand out then return so gravitons work both ways? (no, don't know, yes)
  
• When do loops form? (early, before electrons and positrons, as electrons and positrons form, in black holes, constantly reforming)
  
• When does gravity, with two way gravitons, start working as at present? (initially, after the initial expansion, after the mixing and return that followed the initial expansion, never - at large distances or near the unseen edge of the universe it still does not work normally, other)
  

When we say "initially," that can mean “in the limit as the age of the universe approaches 0 from the positive” Or it could mean truly from time 0.

The Big Bang theory of course says everything existed at the beginning or appeared when the universe was cool enough. On cooling, electrons and protons and neutrons remained and when cooled enough formed atoms. Focus on probability functions leads to suggestions that an uncountable infinity of universe exist, with an uncountable number created constantly, though this extension is not part of the Big Bang theory.

The mnp Model does not yet propose answers for all of these questions, but does answer some differently than the Big Bang theory. The new thoughts in the mnp Model see electrons and positrons being the original recruited shapes leading to durable loops of charge material that can then join in mixed strands to form the quarks. Earlier images of neutrinos as opposing rings have been superseded.

The mnp Model suggests we have one universe, with effect and hence time flowing one direction though gravity is affected by history. Many of the questions on origin have not been answered. Nevertheless, as a thought model, this exploration is titled On the Origin of Universes because a different set of answers might lead to a different universe.
We could explore the questions and answers by looking for connections between the questions, determining which questions or which answers lead to limits on other questions.
We could seek a "basis" in logic algebra or decision algebra (if such exists). Figuring out what is independent, what is orthogonal, and what is orthonormal as a basis will be interesting. Determining the "dimension" of that logical field (or how many degrees of freedom there are) for the Origins of Universes would be fun. If not for me, for someone. Thank you, R Shankar, for the description of vectors, scalars, fields, basis, and normal.

The previous paragraph could be phrased as: many possibilities for when various "constants" come into being exist. I am trying to work out the logic diagrams, nomenclature, and notation to handle the options. I am sure some branch of math has already done this. The answers are certainly not linear in that some of them preclude other answers to other questions.
Instead, the author offers a story in which a number of decisions have been made somewhat arbitrarily, to illustrate the possibilities involved in the origin of a universe with fine-grained structure.

Here is offered a bedtime story with many titles and many subtitles. Choose from “Origins” or “Origin” or “Murmurs of the Beginning” or “A Creation Story” or “Building a Universe”. Or Quiet Expansion or Timeless Expansion or The Grand Recruitment or Building a Universe or Measure or Measuring Space and Time or Forming Place and Then Time or Growing a Universe or Imagination Matter and Time or Not with a Bang but a Whisper. One could argue that the plural of universe is created by various answers to the questions raised. The author suspects only one set of answers to the questions formed the singular universe we all share.

Origin

A narrative for the reader's enjoyment as suggested by the Mostly New Physics Model, mnp
2012-11-29
Gregg Hauser

In a universe long long ago and not too far away, there was nothing. No space, no time, nothing. There was no music announcing the approaching dawn. There was no music to hint at the coming strength and violence of the planets.

Then in that void of no space and no time, there was a place or a very small region with many many many many points, all spinning their own direction, all at the same location. But there was no space and there was no time. Gradually (or quickly for there was no time) the many points aligned their Axis with that of their neighbors for they liked to spin the same direction as other nearby points and eventually (or quickly) ALL the points became aligned in the same direction.

When the Axis of all points was the same, the points realized that by being, they needed
Separation. We are not sure whether Separation acts only when the points are Traveling about the same direction or about the same Axis. It may only act when the points are not the same, in which case something caused the points to separate just a little. We do know that the points started to move outwards from their starting place, perhaps slowly at first and then faster. They started to create space. Still, there was no time, since nothing stopped to compare to other points. Eventually, all the points were separated enough that their Separation pushed no more, or at least pushed only a little. All the points were moving the same speed, the speed they are still moving now. We do not yet know if the points had all moved away from the starting place, but they all moved at the same speed.

Once the points had Separated enough that they had no urge to spread apart further, they discovered that they did like to Travel the same direction with other points, so they tended to clump a little. There were fewer points in some regions of the space they were creating. They also found that as they Traveled, having an Axis was much simpler if it aligned with the line of Travel or if it was at right angles (perpendicular) to the line of travel, for they had an Axis and were always moving. So gradually (or quickly, because there was no time) the points all became separated into 3 types: the right handed spinners, the left handed spinners, and the more numerous spinners with their spin axis at right angles (perpendicular) to their travel.
Even though there were now three types of spinners, there was no light and no particles and no time. The spinners moved their constant speed and spread out more, though they mixed and curved and turned.

Clearly, there were enough spinners with the right amount of Axis alignment urge, Separation urge, and Travel alignment urge that this universe would be lucky enough to eventually create matter and life and intelligence that could marvel at the beauty created, ask why, and seek to understand. But still there was no time, just a universe expanding.

The spinners' urge to align with others in their line of Travel was strong, for filaments of spinners formed. Since spinners also had the urge to align with others in their Axis, the most durable filaments were of spinners of the same Axis type, aligned. Those with Axis along the line of travel or opposite the line of travel were the most durable of all. When filaments encountered filaments traveling nearly the opposite direction, the path was bent. The filaments found that curving, forming loops of constant size was easiest since Separation kept them from forming smaller coils but the urge to follow spinners in front kept the filaments curved. The filaments found that by combining with five other filaments of the same type into a strand, they were even stronger, and by coiling as much as the balance of urges allowed, they met an end of a filament that was their own line, forming a loop. All loops were the same length. Six loops in a strand, all of the same kind of spinner, were most flexible and most durable. We call those durable spheres electrons and positrons.

Now the universe had spinners that could combine to stay in one location, so now space and distance could have meaning. But because the electrons and positrons were close, they interfered with each other and the six loops would come apart. The individual loops held together, and when the volume of the universe expanded enough, the loops could combine. Sometimes with five of one type and one of another, sometimes four of one type and two of another, sometimes three and three to be the largest and heaviest of the combinations, and sometimes six of one type, the smallest and lightest. Forming, breaking, and reforming, eventually the six strand right handed, five left plus one right, and four right plus two left came to predominate. The mixed types, which we now call quarks, were most stable as triplets occasionally exchanging loops.

We have some idea why the third type of spinners, the most common ones, like to move over the surface of those groups, helping glue them together and adding many many more spinners to the groups than the right and left handed spinners themselves. And so the universe had matter, which was eager to interact with other matter.

When light first formed, we do not know. Light became common after protons and electrons were formed and joined into atoms, when the third type of spinner would fill the shell of the outer electrons and sometimes fill enough to expand the shell. When the shell would go back to its usual size, spinners would be released organized as light. We do know that light occurs when the common form of spinners arrange with some number traveling the same direction, with the first half all lined up to spin one way, then the second half lined up to spin exactly the other way. Spinners organized in this sort of group can travel together without being affected (much) by other spinners they encounter. The spinners themselves are moving at their speed and do not see time. Light itself does not see time, so it might have existed before electrons. But until there were electrons and protons, there was no way to make more light except by accident.
When electrons spread around protons to form atoms, the vibration of the electron could measure a new concept, time. Because the atoms would keep their distance from other atoms, space could be measured.

The universe now had a way to tell time, to measure distances, and to combine into atoms and light. And it was good.

And here, the Newest Creation Story ends.

But the universe did not stop creating.

Other stories tell how the stars formed from these atoms (and created new atoms), how those stars make light, how some of them make the medium sized atoms that become planets, how some stars make the heavy atoms that make rare and interesting additions to the planets, how our own planet formed, how the atoms of this planet combined into forms that could make more of themselves and how those forms got bigger and more complicated and eventually the forms that we know as people became self aware and curious enough to ask how this universe came to be and where knowledge came from.

That is all a wonderful part of creation, but not a part of this Creation Story.

But know that we now have music to announce the dawn, and a name for the first creator of this music and a name for his creation. We do have music to describe the movement and power of the planets, and a name for the first creator of that music and a name for his creation. And we have some knowledge of how the universe works. And some knowledge of how we as people work. And when we use and enjoy that knowledge, it is good.

Background Notes

This Creation Story comes from the mnp Model, A Fine Grain Architecture of the Universe, which suggests that two principles, three tiny entities, and three effects acting only over very small distances can account for the observed universe. See http://www.worldlyte.com/physics/mnp

The exact order of constant speed, Axis alignment, Separation, and the development of entities of exactly three types is not postulated in the mnp Model. Travel alignment may have little or no effect until all entities had completed their initial Separation, which would argue for formation of particles after an initial expansion, with development occurring in both directions from that initial radius.

The balance of this Story comes directly from the mnp Model, though names of the entities and effects have been changed