Abstract
The mnp Model now offers an understanding of energy and the Planck constant h in a Model based on a limited set of first principles.
The ability to redirect other entities has the units mc2. So energy is seen as an ability to turn other entities. Mass emerges from the number of basic entities and their equal effects. The Planck constant arises from the behavior of electron shells and the basic ability to turn. The new understanding of the Planck constant allows the dimensions of the basic entities and a limit on the influence distance to be calculated, and suggestions for electron size and density to be offered.
Apparent energy of light and neutrinos in a moving frame is explained.
Transfer of energy into motion is discussed.
Momentum might be conserved by matter, but not by fields. This is the weakest part of the post, since an explanation and understanding of the useful four-momentum is not yet written out.
These developments grew from investigating the fields created by moving neutrinos, to be covered in a subsequent post.
Table of Contents
- Abstract
- Background
- Conserved Quantities
- Mass Emerges
- Changing Direction
- Motion and Effort
- Planck's Constant h
- Coils, Momentum, and Matter Waves
- Separation - Was the Third Basic Effect in the mnp Model
- Conclusion
- Appendix
- Suggestions for Quantized Loop Formation
- Momentum
- Nature of the Effects - Philosophy
- Catalogue of Influence
- Humor
- Endnotes
Background
The mnp Model sees all fields, matter, and potential in the universe as being formed by three types of basic entities with two ways to interact and few other attributes. These entities interact in a flat, unstructured region of three spatial dimensions. Since those entities all change locations at the same rate, the potential for time or change or entropy exists. The entities all have the same unchanging ability to influence other entities to align with the line of Travel (parallel or anti-parallel). The unchanging but limited amount that entities can influence and be influenced allows change to occur as entities cover distance. All entities have an Axis. For type n, Axis aligns with Travel. For type p, it is opposite Travel. For type m, Axis is perpendicular to Travel. All entities have the same ability to influence other entities to align parallel with Axis, though this ability is not as strong as the alignment with Travel. The abilities to affect are limited to short distances. Over a much shorter distance, effects will be experienced by only one entity if overlapped. This is called Separation.
Entities can have two influences: to align by Travel direction and to align by Axis. Axis (which leads to charge/magnetism/electrical effects) will be ignored in this post. Over any short length of movement, an entity will attempt to change the Travel direction of any entity within the influence radius to be more aligned (parallel or anti-parallel) with its own direction. Both entities will change by an equal but opposite angle. The effect is symmetrical in the spherical coordinate system around any entity's line of Travel. All entities have the same ability to influence to align by Travel direction. Over any given length of movement when an entity changes the Travel direction of another entity by some angle, its Travel direction is changed by an equal angle in the opposite direction. If one entity affects two entities, its angle changes by the negative sum of the affect. So angle changes are additive and conserved.
[ 1. basic entities oncoming and 2. traveling similar directions ]
Basic entities interact only when separated from other entities by a tiny distance. If an entity is hidden by another within the Separation distance, it does not influence or receive influence until the covering entity has moved to no longer “ shield” the “ shielded”" entity. Events occur because the basic effects are limited in how much effect can be transmitted or received over a distance of movement.
Matter exists because basic entities can form filaments that form loops that twist into coils that can remain in one place or move slowly. Time is measured by matter oscillations.
The letter m was chosen as mediators, magnetic, messenger. The letter n was chosen for negative, the basic entities with an Axis parallel to the direction of Travel that make up electrons and the negatively charged filaments in quarks. The letter p was chosen for positive, the basic entities with Axis anti parallel to the direction of Travel that make up positrons and the positively charged loops that combine as six to provide the charge and structure force quarks.
The basic entities and the coils they form to provide the structure for fermions are tiny in scale, somewhat smaller than the author had imagined.
Conserved Quantities
The speed of light, the number of basic entities, the ability of those entities to influence, the direction of those entities if uninfluenced, the influence distance, and the Separation distance are postulated to be conserved. (1)
Mass Emerges
What is mass? The equal ability of all entities to influence and be influenced is mass. Influence is posited as the same for all entities, so the mass of all entities is therefore the same.
Changing Direction
Take the simplest “ particle” in the universe, the neutrino. For now consider the neutrino as a bundle of m entities whose Axis orientations are random with vector average of 0. (2)
What is involved in changing the direction of the neutrino? Since it cannot be sped up or slowed down, the influence and change must be lateral to the direction of Travel. In mnp, every result other than continuing in a straight line at c must be caused. A classical analysis of work does not help since no work is done by orbiting or changing direction. But the classic concept of change perpendicular to Travel, angular acceleration mV^2/R IS helpful. Pick an arbitrary R, the influence must be exerted perpendicular to Travel and be present over the distance of movement. As a scalar, that amounts to mv^2 over R times R times the angle of direction change. The R drops out. So to turn the neutrino 90 degrees takes mc^2 times pi/2. The same units as energy, classical and modern.
[ 3. Pure redirection - effort proportional to angle ]
[ 4. straight travel, 5. 90 degree turn, 6. straight to capture ]
What happens in the hypothetical case of neutrino capture? If the neutrino could be caught by a particle and the result then brought to rest, the neutrino would add m entities to the mass of the particle.
Capture and release of travelers is not a matter of changing just the direction of the traveler. The traveler will participate in the joining process and become part of the coiling of the particle. Release is the opposite - during the transition from particle to free traveler, the lateral portion of the change to traveler direction is provided by the coils. Let's try a restatement. The traveler, while part of a particle, is moving at c in circular coils with the rest of the particle. While a part of the particle, it contributes to the mass of the particle. During capture, as it is redirected into the particle, the lateral effort influence on the traveler as it turns is supplied by the coils. Only the longitudinal effort to turn the traveler 90 degrees is seen by particle. The effort required to absorb the traveler is mc^2, based on the integral of the longitudinal component of the centripetal acceleration.
If the particle were at rest before, after the mc^2 of the neutrino has been applied, the particle will have its entities, on average, moving at a slightly different angle. The angle of difference will be m/M (actually m/(m+M)) since the neutrino had to be influenced by mc^2 which came from changing the angles of the particle's entities. If seen as a ring,
[ 7. Diagram of logical ring with skewed entities ]
So the capturing particle has more entities and has a net angle of m/(M+m). If the particle had been at rest, the new velocity is now moving at mc/(M+m), hinting at classical conservation of momentum for particles at very low speeds absorbing small travelers.
If the particle were moving at .707c when it captured the neutrino, the entities in the particle are rotating .707c lateral to the velocity, and .707c in the direction of particle movement. The author thinks of 45 degrees as the attack angle. So only .5 of the mc^2 influence would be needed to capture that neutrino (the neutrino goes through a change of 45 degrees, but the lateral influence will be provided by the coils), since the other component of the neutrino's initial Travel becomes part of the particle's net Travel. Note that the particle would see the neutrino as having lower influence hence lower energy.
[ 8. diagram of logical ring with entities moving at 45 degrees for travel at .707c - 9. cross section of capture when traveling the same direction ]
So the units of direction change and energy are the same. The concepts may well be equivalent. Notice that the energy of the neutrino as seen by the moving, in Minkowski space, particle is less if moving the same direction. (3)
In this Minkowski space of angle change and capture by coil, some of the Lorentz transformations are already appearing.
Motion and Effort
For a particle to travel along a line at a velocity v, the entities must be redirected so that they will travel at an angle from a perpendicular to the line of travel equal to the arcsin of the desired velocity v over c. Since the author is interested in understanding what travel at velocity v requires in terms of turning the basic entities in the particle, a full development with limited hand waving is warranted. The entities in the particle must be bent from their average 0 degrees to move at angle A. A is the arcsin of v/c. The diagram shows a conceptual cross section of the entities rotating in a stationary particle reduced to a ring of rotating entities. Hand wave on averaging entities longitudinal coiling motion noted here.
[ 10. Motion and Attack Angle ]
For redirecting particles and for capture and emission, the differential effort required to move from the resting position is not da times mc^2. but sin a da times mc^2. The indefinite integral of sin a da is -cos a. Integrating from 0 to A gives -cos A + 1 or the negated trailing terms of the Taylor series expansion for cos A, viz. A^2/2!-A^4/4!+A^6/6!-... so the result is mc^2 A^2/2
At low angles, Ac = v, so apparently the turning effort to reach speed v is mv^2 / 2 which equals the classic kinetic energy to reach speed v from rest.
Planck's Constant h
Previous blog postings have attempted to understand why the basic number of quantum mechanics has units of classical angular momentum. Two blog posts have investigated the reason for h's units and tried to make sense of the magnitude of h without notable success. The mnp Model's new answer to that question rests on the description of the electron as a coiled strand of 6 quantized filaments of charge material (n's) with Axis aligned with Travel direction, as described in the outdated mnp Treatise The basis of electron behavior and shape remains the same as described before. Each of the six loops in the strand is a truly fixed length of entities moving at the same speed c. To form a closed shape, a single uncoiling of the strand is necessary. The exactly equal lengths leads to the need for an electron to uncoil and untwist in order to move or adopt the shape of a spherical or complicated shell. Two coils must be removed from the path of the loop for movement or to change orbital angular momentum.
Understanding how much angular change must be applied to the coils to achieve those uncoilings has taken the author some time. The coils, with the balance of Separation against Travel and Axis alignment effects, have a naturally tight coil and a fixed length of loop. That “ steady state” or “ reference frame” is moving at c and tightly coiled. If we conceptually unravel the coil and break it so we can draw a straight line of reference, we get
[ 11. cross section of coil change (in coiling reference “frame”) ]
where the curvature to be applied is enough to shorten the horizontal side. Since to take out two coils requires changing the strand curvature enough that its effective length is 2 coil circumferences less.
The change to the loop will be a curve of very large radius and small angle. The angle is so small the secant essentially = the arc length 2 theta.
If we use number of coils as the independent variable,
coil circumference = loop length / ncoils theta must be chosen so that 1-cos theta = 2 coil circumference / loop length = 2 / ncoils since theta is small, so 1-cos theta = theta^2/2 so substituting, theta^2 / 2 = 2 / ncoils or theta = 2 / sqrt(ncoils) The angle by which the curvature must be changed is twice the angle of “ uncoiling” so the effort to redirect Me by 2 theta is Mec2 2 theta
Time for one loop completion is only a function of loop length Time for one loop completion is loop_length/c
Effort sustained through one loop completion is Mec2 2 theta loop_length / c -or- Mec 2 theta loop_length -or- Mec 4 theta loop_length / sqrt(ncoils)
Integrating the effort to open the two loops over the time taken for an entire loop traverse represents the duration during which the 2 loops must be kept open so the change in the electron shell, whatever it is, can complete. A sudden change in one area needs to propagate and, to reach a measurable steady state, even out over the entire electron. The electron may then be held in that configuration by m's trapped by its new larger surface or by the additional field of the new proton in the nucleus or by a magnetic field or, if moving, by the field created by its movement. More on fields created by moving particles in a subsequent blog posting.
The length of the loops that provide structure for the fermions is chosen to be 3 meters, since that is the distance the entities can travel at c in 10-8 seconds. Weak interactions take 10-8 seconds to completely change the structure of fermions or, in mnp terms, completely unravel the strand that makes up the fermion structure while perhaps forming a new structure. A table of values for angular effort times the time for changes in the loop to occur over its entire length gives:
[Number of Coils and J*s to Keep Entire Loop Open]
Number of coils 1e10 1e20 1e24 1e28 1e40 Coil diameter 9.6e-11 9.6e-21 9.6e-25 9.6e-29 9.6e-41 Angle change 2e-5 2e-10 2e-12 2e-14 2e-20 J*s - one loop 3.28e-26 3.28e-31 3.28e-33 3.28e-35 3.28e-41
Since this range includes h, we might have enough confidence to calculate number of coils directly. In closed form:
J*s = Me c2 (4/sqrt(nc)) * (loop_length / c)
So in this universe, a direct calculation of number of coils from h is
(4 Me c loop_length / h)2 -or- (4 Me c2 loop_time / h)2
Coil diameter would be loop_length/(pi*number_of_coils). Combining the two equations seems like code obfuscation.
So the mnp Model prediction for number of coils is 2.45e25 and coil diameter 3.9e-26 m which is far more plausible than numbers from the previous blog postings. The coil diameter is the upper limit on influence distance. Two possible origins for the quantized loops are investigated in the Appendix, giving Separation distance, entity sizes and masses within a factor of 1.6, and electron size and density ranges.
This is a back of the envelope calculation, but with the structural explanation of the mnp Model, suggests a reason for the magnitude and units of the Planck constant h.
Coils, Momentum, and Matter Waves
Matter waves in modern physics are seen as having a real and an imaginary part. The analogue in the mnp Model is the coils of charge loop structure plus m's as gluons, surfaces, and fields plus the electron shell coils with their m's as trapped shell energy, all individually moving at c. So in a translation between the mnp Model and the matter wave model, the real part of the matter wave is the forward component of all the basic entities in the particle, the imaginary part is the component of the entity movement at c that is transverse to the wave/particle movement. The square of those magnitudes should be conserved since it represents the real coiling entities.
If the charge portion(s) are significant and different from the distribution of mass of the particle, the real part of charge matter wave is the longitudinal component of the coils of n's and p's while the imaginary part of the charge travel is the transverse component coiling of the n loops and p loops. Again, the square should be constant for an unchanging particle.
If mnp were reduced to a mathematical formulation, there would be three spatial dimensions for components of the wave, one time, three direction dimensions for the actual components of the field unless this is the “imaginary” part of the spatial dimensions, and three different types of entities (m's, n's, p's) on perhaps one or perhaps three dimensions, plus perhaps three dimensions for the net Axis direction at each point. Since Axis evolves in the opposite direction from Travel for p's and in the direction of Travel for n's, mathematical separation along an “entity” dimension or dimensions would be needed. So one could seek 10 mathematical dimensions (or 8).
For early development, the author believes discrete simulation will offer faster understanding and development, even though its falutin index (technical term credited to DDL, personal communication) is lower.
Separation - Was the Third Basic Effect in the mnp Model
Recent work with the waves created in the random field potential that surrounds matter in a galaxy, to be documented in a forthcoming blog posting, leads to a major re-factoring of the mnp Model and profound re-examination of the Separation Effect.
The Separation effect does not cause any movement or change itself. So it is not an active effect If two entities coincide then one ceases to be influenced, so that when the first is influenced to move in some other direction, the second continues uninfluenced until it is separate enough to be influenced. One could take a quantum/statistical mechanics attitude and suggest that the two are indistinguishable. If the basic entities have conceptual parts or dFigments, those parts are indistinguishable and it is not possible to tell what went in from what came out, just that two basic entities came out.
Whether Separation is limited to situations when entities also have essentially the same direction or not is to be decided in simulation. In most cases other than in the coils that provide structure to matter and at the initial and only singularity at the origin of the universe, the time of overlap will be tiny, so the effect will be small. The strongest argument for similar direction being important may be the apparent durability of the coils, which have lifetimes at least as long as protons.
Separation could be seen as a quantum effect in that only so much influence can occur in a tiny region over a time or a distance. If more than one entity occupies the same tiny region, it is as if it isn't there in any fashion whatsoever. So in a sense, the mass of the universe was not apparent until the entities became separated enough. Or one can say the mass of the universe did not exist until the initial separation occurred.
The new understanding of Separation allows for the formation of quantum loops in a region too dense for normal behavior, due to a lack of competition and fields. (4) The elegance and simplicity of this new description of Separation makes it an attractive addition to the mnp Model.
Conclusion
The yet unpublished exploration of field effects from moving neutrinos and moving polarized bundles of energy called fhotons in the mnp Model has led to understanding of interaction leading only to redirection. This leads to understanding of energy, motion and energy, apparent energy in a moving frame, and the Planck constant. It led to an incomplete but better understanding of momentum and particles and matter waves, and to an ongoing refactoring of the mnp Model.
Appendix
The author prefers to use the term figments in place of the phrase basic entities and indulges in that preference in the Appendix, though not in the endnotes.
Suggestions for Quantized Loop Formation
For an electron, if loop_length is known, coil diameter is d, and the Separation distance is Sep, then
number of figments per electron is 6 loop_length / Sep, number of coils per electron is loop_length / pi d.
Two images of quantized loop formation seem reasonable.
Cylinder Model - Torus Model of Quantized Loop Formation
If coils formed into a torus with figments packed as closely as possible in the coil and coils packed as closely as possible on the inner circumference of the “ hole in the doughnut", the diameter of the inner portion of the torus is equal to the coil diameter.
Number of coils around the center = Pi d / sep = loop length / pi d Sep (loop_length / pi^2) = d^2 -or- Since the Planck constant investigation has a coil diameter d, Sep = pi^2 d^2 / loop_length
If the compact cylinder with a same curvature S shaped connector is the origin of quantized loops, then
Number of coils = 2 d / Sep (ignore any +1) = loop_length / pi d nfig = 2pi 2d 6loop length over sep squared Sep = 2pi d^2 / loop_length
Can coils emerge quantized from the dense soup because there is no competition? In a steady state, long cylinders would be the norm. In a “ pressurized" state, the torus model might be more likely. In any case, we have an approximate number for Separation distance and hence for the number of figments in an electron.
Torus Cylinder Units
Separation distance 3.2e-51 to 5.0e-51 m
Number of figments in an electron 5.7e51 to 3.6e51
Figment mass 1.61e-81 to 2.53e-82 m
Maximum density at separation distance (hexagonal packing)
2.3389e69 to 5.77e69 kg/m^3
Compact electron size 12x12x4*10-26 or 4x4x8*10-26 m
Compact electron density 2.2e45 7.7e45 kg/m^3
The electron is close enough to a point to be considered such in modern physics. Compare density to the Planck density 5.2e96 kg/m^3
Momentum
Momentum is easy to picture, as net movement of the entire combination. The actual difficulties are discussed below. The author has been blithely claiming absorption and emission of neutrinos and fhotons will conserve momentum, and any viable candidate model must follow experiment. An honest approach to the interaction of pairs of figments, suggests that classical momentum is NOT conserved at the single figment level. Apparently fields will not conserve momentum in and among themselves. Adjusting the simple calculations for time of interaction (oncoming figments have less time to interact than those intersecting at acute angles) may not be sufficient. For example, Travel alignment of two oncoming figments crossing paths will both align more closely and the momentum will shift in that direction and increase along the direction of Travel(?). With Travel alignment, two fellow-moving figments crossing paths tend to average their direction, slightly shifting momentum toward the bisecting angle.
[ Oncoming entity interaction - Approaching entity interaction ]
The particle coils averaging and capturing of effects and figments is expected to be the major contributor to momentum “working out.” When the math or simulation of particles absorbing figments is worked out, then absorbing neutrinos fhotons and other particles including gluons will easily follow.
Tuning of the transfer functions of Axis and Travel may be needed, but that tuning can only depend on the angle of intersection (and issues of offset within the radius of influence). Individual interactions might be Figment Dynamics (there will be no Figment Statics, as any waking audience members already guessed). Aggregate behavior may be called Figment Mechanics. In my dreams.
Axis only shows more transverse and more longitudinal variation compared to classical momentum. A mix of Travel and Axis alignment, with Travel twice as strong as Axis, shows intermediate variation.
The author hopes to avoid adjusting the transfer function in line with the time of interaction to tune for momentum. Hopefully an old fourth effect, Transverse will not be required to make momentum work directly.
The unevenness of momentum and the need for particles to react, capture, and release change requires that the coils be active in transferring effects. Matter waves will be useful simplifying concepts in this regard. See Coils, Momentum, and Matter Waves in the body of the post.
Nature of the Effects - Philosophy
Gravity has monopoles precisely because the Travel effect works in both directions (symmetrically over each 90 degree range). There is no toward or away with gravity and Travel alignment, only the divergence of directions and the graviton count or density.
Magnetism does not have monopoles because the Axis alignment is one way, over a 180 degree range. Electric and magnetic effects always have a toward and away.
Catalogue of Influence
The ability to influence direction depends on the nature of the influencer. A short catalog:
A neutrino moving at c, with no polarization and no charge material, can change the angle of the figments in the field potential it passes through toward alignment in both directions along the line of Travel of the neutrino.
A magnetic field has m's with Axis aligned. The m's themselves will be moving perpendicular to the Axis alignment, so magnetic effects do not stay in one place but, to appear in one place, must be refreshed.
So alignment with the Axis will be the net effect. As charge approaches c, transverse magnetic fields are less and less effective since the angle between the Axis of the moving charge and the field are close (to be examined). For a stationary charge, the average Axis of the charge will be perpendicular to the Axis of the field, so no force or acceleration results.
A static charge field has Axis aligned radially with the source, Axis out for a negative charge and in for a positive charge. The m's in the field tend to move more tangentially, with Axis aligned with the charge Axis.
Gravity has gravitons mostly m's moving in and out of the mass along radial paths, attracting figments to align vertically going either in or out by Travel alignment.
Musings on Figment Dynamics later Figment Charge Dynamics
The ansatz used for Travel effect is that it is proportional to the cosine of the angle of intersection or near intersection. This guess allows the interaction to cross 0 at 90 degrees, where the Travel alignment effect is expected to be 0. So that figments in closer alignments affect more. In the distant future, tuning the Travel alignment function may be possible. For now, relative magnitudes and experience with simulation is a higher priority. Using both spreadsheet and python, the author found comparison of both helped shake bugs out of both systems.
With good drawings, computation might not even have been needed. Clearly, the lateral is not preserved when oncoming. Longitudinal is going down in magnitude, since the one seen as skewed in the coordinate system gets more y change that the one initially aligned does. Alternate - both are becoming more opposed, so there is less net difference. Even weighted averages (oncoming figments see each other for a shorter period of time) will not support a blind search for momentum conservation.
Still, since stationary collections and since particles are unified by their loops of charge material, they will not spread too far and at some level must act as a unit.
Philosophically, each figment must know only its own coordinate system and the effects of the nearby figments. They could remember a coordinate system (Axis supplies some of that, the basis for a 3d coordinate system for m's but only an axial coordinate system for n's and p's) but a remembered coordinate system doesn't seem useful in trying to force momentum conservation. A model that depends on a postieri tuning depending on coordinate systems is not viable.
Musings on Figment Mechanics
A first computational step in simulating the effect of a field figment on a coiling particle will be to model an electron at rest, with not fields, so influence can be introduced one at a time. Is the “perfectly elastic” attraction of two figments - looks like it might not preserve momentum in orthogonal coordinate systems? Is so, does having a set of coils “stationary” allow that influence to be balanced out so that momentum is conserved
Classical mechanics conserves energy in non-dissipative systems. The entrapping particle is, in a way, dissipating the sideways (not forward) momentum.
History
The author has had the privilege of working on the mnp Model without public interruption or pressure since August of 2011. Early that month, sitting in the woods in southern Sweden, the author imagined “ the universe being filled with points so happy to be here that they all moved at a constant speed.” Even the author sees this as a rhetorical device, but proceeded to develop the mnp Model based on that idea.
Humor
Complement: Doesn't read much but thinks a lot.
Not: Doesn't understand much but thinks a lot.
Endnotes
Since basic entities are no longer created or destroyed, entities are conserved though they form the random field potential as well as the gravitational forces.
This blog posting has already seen energy described as ability of entities to turn and be turned. Energy emerges from a basic principle. Mass has been described as the resistance to influence (and the ability to influence) of the entities. The mnp concept of mass seems to be consistent with modern particle physics emphasis on rest mass and E and mc^2. Mass emerges and is conserved as long as the captured “ energy" of neutrinos and photons is included.
In like manner to mass, charge is persistent only in particles made of loops of n's and p's which have their Axis aligned with Travel. Free n's and p's are easily redirected and take crucial part in static electric and electromagnetic fields, but do not constitute charge. Current loops are conserved but some free loops may be present in the field potential. Since free loops are formed in the modern universe only when positrons and electrons annihilate, charge is conserved. (The author recognizes this exposition is descriptive, not persuasive.)
The author hopes to derive as much of physics as possible. In that he is not alone - string theory and quantum loop gravity have (had) similar ambitions.
Having had some success explaining concepts energy absorption in different frames, of time dilation and length contraction as being an essential part of movement, at understanding the two way speed of light experiments, at providing images of matter consistent with quantum mechanics, the author is guardedly optimistic. Hopes to derive concepts to “ explain from basic principles" gravity, fields, magnetism and electromagnetism. Derive Lorentz transformations though (spoiler alert) at the expense of frame independence.
Measured time will be derived, though time is inherent in the position change of all basic entities and the limit on amount of interaction over movement.
Questioning conservation includes future discussions of whether Travel direction is conserved (not would have made the initial formation of quantized loops simpler). Whether instead of space expanding the basic entities are slowing at a corresponding rate may be an interesting question.
The mnp Model has two views of the structure of neutrinos. They may be amorphous relatively dense collections of m's with random Axis orientations with resultant 0. They may be rings with balanced Axis either inward or outward directed. The exact form is not important in the present context of this blog posting. The behavior of neutrinos suggests to the author that there is no charge material (n's or p's) at all in neutrinos.
3. Capture by particles moving toward the traveler
If moving different directions, the traveler's mass/energy will be seen as more by the capturing particle. At .707c toward, the neutrino will be hard to capture, since many of the oncoming entities in the particle will try to align with the neutrino rather than turning it toward the particle's direction. A charged traveler would be easier to capture. But say it is possible with the help of some coils of the moving particle moving, for a short distance, in the necessary direction. The last 90 degrees of the turn to join the particle will take mc^2 effort, as the section drawing on the right suggests. The first 45 degrees of turn, to perpendicular to the traveling particle's figment movement, is as difficult as the next 90 degrees, since the coils offer no assistance. Both the .5c component perpendicular to the particle and the .5c component anti-parallel to the average figment must be countered by the particle's coils. Mathematically, of course, mc^2/(tan .5 angle of intersection) behaves properly, but a solid first principles mnp explanation is needed.
[ Schematic of traveler capture while traveling toward at .707c ]
The mnp Model offers an alternate explanation for the big expansion of modern cosmology. If the initial expansion proceeded at c without matter having been formed, there would be no time or history and that would allow gravitons to reach as far as they do so that they could return for the two-way behavior of gravitons to which the modern universe is accustomed, after which the recruitment of modern particles took place followed by the current expansion. Return and Looping will be a future post.
No comments:
Post a Comment