* HM says particles either have or consist of wave packets; I don't know which. Who knows what is likely meant by wave packets in HM? Here's what Wikipedia says about it and shows this graphic. A wave packet without dispersion.
In physics, a wave packet is a short "burst" or "envelope" of wave action that travels as a unit. A wave packet can be analyzed into, or can be synthesized from, an infinite set of component sinusoidal waves of different wavenumbers, with phases and amplitudes such that they interfere constructively only over a small region of space, and destructively elsewhere.[1] Depending on the evolution equation, the wave packet's envelope may remain constant (no dispersion, see figure) or it may change (dispersion) while propagating. Quantum mechanics ascribes a special significance to the wave packet: it is interpreted to be a "probability wave" describing the probability that a particle or particles in a particular state will be measured to have a given position and momentum. It is in this way similar to the wave function.
The mathematics of quantum mechanics is strictly local-differential in its structure, thus solely permitting the representation of valence bonds as occurring between point particles interacting at large mutual distances. This representation is evidently valid in first approximation because electrons have indeed a point-like charge. Nevertheless, electrons do not have a point-like wave packet. As a consequence, the local-differential representation is insufficient because of the lack of treatment of the mutual penetration of the electron wavepackets that has a strictly nonlocal-integral structure.
* If aether is rigid, what kind of waves are transmitted through it? I can see how longitudinal waves could be transmitted, like sound waves, which are spherical pressure and decompression waves. But I don't see how transverse waves could be transmitted. The graphic above is transverse. Is that an EM wave packet? Is EM an electric field and a magnetic field force or energy movement?
Lloyd
Re: Hadronic Mechanics Revolution
* Here's more from the link above.
[There is] the current conception of hadrons as empty spheres with isolated point-particles in its interior, while, in the reality of nature, hadrons are the densest physical media measured by mankind until now. In fact, hadrons are composed of particles with extended wavepackets in condition of total mutual penetration (because the size of any wavepacket is of the same order of magnitude as the size of all hadrons).
Moreover, I have spent several years of my research life to prove that Arp¹s astrophysical observations are correct (physical contact of certain quasars and their associated galaxies despite dramatically different cosmological redshifts). My solution is just elementary: light necessarily slows down in the extremely huge quasars chromospheres. Inspection of the Doppler¹s law then establishes that light merely exits the quasars chromospheres already redshifted, thus explaining the difference in redshift with the associated galaxy, where chromosphere-type effects are much much smaller. That is all (see the Proceedings of the Olympia Conference for a detailed presentation). THAT is the real reason why Arp CANNOT even tolerate my studies, short of suffering imaginary personal damages. In fact, the slow-down solution implies an irreconcilable departure from the beloved Einsteinian doctrines, since the speed of light is no longer that in vacuum, t hus causing a host of catastrophic inconsistencies for the special and general relativities). Moreover, my very elementary explanation evidently casts shadows to Arp¹s rather complicated interpretation, demanding ³niente-po-po-di-meno-che², as we say in Italian, the ³act of creation² inside quasars. How can Arp solution survive the exact-numerical representation via the slow-down of the speed of light within physical media?
Harry Costas
Re: Hadronic Mechanics Revolution
G'day
On the topic of Redshift, there are over a dozen mechanisms to cause redshift.
One in particular is the dynamic properties of compact matter that is able to expel or contract EM waves.
Authors: Schun T. Uechi, Hiroshi Uechi (Submitted on 21 Jul 2010 (v1), last revised 26 Jul 2010 (this version, v2))
Abstract: The chiral nonlinear ($sigma,pi,omega$) mean-field model is an extension of the conserving nonlinear (nonchiral) $sigma$-$omega$ hadronic mean-field model which is thermodynamically consistent, relativistic and Lorentz-covariant mean-field theory of hadrons. In the extended chiral ($sigma,pi,omega$) mean-field model, all the masses of hadrons are produced by chiral symmetry breaking mechanism, which is different from other conventional chiral partner models. By comparing both nonchiral and chiral mean-field approximations, the effects of chiral symmetry breaking to the mass of $sigma$-meson, coefficients of nonlinear interactions, coupling ratios of hyperons to nucleons and Fermi-liquid properties are investigated in nuclear matter, hyperonic matter, and neutron stars.
Preon particles such as Axions Anion, Higgs the most basic of all have a wave patern that allows them to group to gether and form large wave packets, its called quantum memory to eventually form quarks that form Neutrons and Protons. This process forms part of a cyclic process of matter to energy and vice versa as per E=MC^2.
mharratsc
Re: Hadronic Mechanics Revolution
I don't see how this "Chiral-particle Approach to Hadrons in an Extended Chiral ($sigma,pi,omega$) Mean-Field Model" deals with redshift in the EM spectrum except by implication.
How do you know the fabled Higgs-boson will "group to form large wave packets"? LHC find something while I wasn't looking? (From Wikipedia: "The Higgs boson is a hypothetical massive scalar elementary particle predicted to exist by the Standard Model in particle physics. ...)
That is an absolutely unadulterated statement of faith. You have faith that when this particle IS discovered, that it will behave exactly the way you believe it will. That is not scientific method, Harry.
Lastly, the following statement cannot be true:
"This process forms part of a cyclic process of matter to energy and vice versa as per E=MC^2."
E=MC^2 is only true in a perfect vacuum, correct? Because that is the only place where the speed of light is at Einstein's limit. And so far, we haven't found a 'perfect vacuum' in space anywhere, as far as I know.
That is one of the reasons why so many people put their faith in the known behavior of matter in a plasma state and Maxwell's well-proven formulae on this site, and steer away from the 'Mathematical Conjecture of the Month Club' stuff on mainstream forums...
Grey Cloud
Re: Hadronic Mechanics Revolution
Hi Mike,
'Mathematical Conjecture of the Month Club'
Brilliant.
Lloyd
Re: Hadronic Mechanics Revolution
QUASAR CHROMOSPHERE * The points I meant to emphasize in my previous quote above is this.
Arp¹s astrophysical observations are correct (physical contact of certain quasars and their associated galaxies despite dramatically different cosmological redshifts). ... light merely exits the quasars' chromospheres already redshifted, thus explaining the difference in redshift with the associated galaxy, where chromosphere-type effects are much much smaller.
* So Santilli says quasars and galaxies have chromospheres [like our Sun?] which redshift emitted light. I've read Thornhill speculate that quasars are highly ionized and the ionization is what redshifts their light more than their companion galaxies. I think the Sun's chromosphere is above the photosphere and the corona is above the chromosphere. The solar wind moves through all 3 layers; doesn't it? The solar wind is ionized, so Thornhill would seem to be likely correct. But is there a property of chromospheres besides ionization that could redshift light? And is it certain that quasars and galaxies do generally have chromospheres?
Lloyd
Re: Hadronic Mechanics Revolution
TACHYONS - Particles that go faster than light * Thornhill has agreed with Sansbury's model of hadrons containing "subtrons", which orbit each other at speeds much greater than lightspeed. So subtrons would be tachyons. * Santilli also appears to think that hadrons contain tachyons, but perhaps only a little faster than light. I don't know exactly what range he considers, but I've only seen mention of speeds up to about 1.6c. http://www.i-b-r.org/ir00012.htm
The Physics of Tachyons
E. L. WALL (IRB, Monteroduni, Italy and Palm Harbor, USA) 1995, ISBN 1-57485-001-6, 241 pages, $65
This book provides a completely novel tachyonic model of the structure of hadrons and other particles. While the existence of tachyons has been debated for many years, the agreement with experiment that this model produces for a large number of known particles provides evidence that tachyons do, in fact, exist. The model described in this monograph is a unified particle model that describes electrons, muons, protons, neutrons, mesons, and light nuclei. After studying this book, the reader will have an excellent understanding of the characteristics of these particles. This book is written not only for practicing scientists and engineers but also for undergraduate and graduate students in the physical sciences. Some historical commentary in the early tachyon theory is provided along with a comparison of this model with existing particle modes. The identification of conventional tachyons as isotardions within physical media is also studied. Many references to the published particle literature are provided so that the reader can compare his calculated results with original, published experimental data.
It should be stressed that, by no means, hadronic constituents traveling faster than the speed of light in vacuum are necessarily "tachyons" [By no means are they tachyons - Lloyd]. In fact, they are ordinary particles with ordinary, real, positive mass. The change is in the maximal causal speed. In fact, the only meaning of tachyons in isominkowskian spaces is that of particles traveling faster than the maximal causal speed C = c/n4, and not faster than c (these particles are called "isotachyons" [V-12]). - Another aspect researchers should be aware of is that, by no means, the constant speed in vacuum c is replaced by another "universal constant" C inside hadrons. All hadrons have approximately the same charge radius (of about 1 fm), but they have all different masses. As a result, hadrons have all different densities that increase with mass. The term n4-squared in the fourth component of the isominkowskian metric m* geometrizes precisely that density (the density of the vacuum being normalized to 1). This implies that the maximal causal speed in the interior of hadrons cannot possibly be a new constant and actually varies from hadron to hadron because it varies with its density.
1. REDUCTION OF THE STRUCTURE OF MATTER TO ELECTRONS AND PROTONS VERIFYING HADRONIC MECHANICS As stated in the original proposal (38) of 1978, hadronic mechanics has been constructed for the reduction of the structure of all matter ([and] antimatter) in the universe to the only known stable and massive particles, electrons and protons ([and] their antiparticles).
* Here's Santilli's view of the origin of neutrons and atoms larger than hydrogen inside stars. I think EU would say it originates inside the plasma Z-pinch, which is where stars and planets originate as well.
... stars initiate their lives as being solely composed of hydrogen, and end their lives by releasing all natural elements. This implies the synthesis in the interior of stars, first, of the neutron from protons and electrons, then of the deuteron and then of all other natural elements.
NEUTRINOS DON'T EXIST * This undermines Sansbury's model of subtrons, but the argument is persuasive. See below.
... no representation of hadrons can be considered truly serious without a quantitative representation of what they actually are in the physical reality: extended, nonspherical and deformable charge distributions.
14. LACK OF NEED OF THE NEUTRINO HYPOTHESIS FOR EXTENDED HADRONS There is little doubt that, on real scientific grounds (those outside outside academic politics), neutrinos constitute the biggest controversy of the 20-th century for numerous reasons, such as the lack of clear experimental evidence of neutrinos via scattering processes. Supporters of the neutrino hypothesis argue that this is due to the lack of charge as well as of (appreciable?) mass. However, the belief that the flux of about 10^23 solar neutrinos per cm^2 could pass throughout the entire Earth without any collision has no credibility at all, thus casting serious shadows on the existence of the neutrinos themselves. - Other reasons to doubt the existence of the neutrinos are due to the essential failure of the Gran Sasso laboratory in Italy, as well as other laboratories, to achieve unequivocal detections of neutrinos in significant numbers despite huge investment over a protracted period of time. Subsequently, there have been a number of alleged detections of neutrinos. However, inspection of the detectors reveals the presence of radioactive elements some of which emit precisely the excitation frequency for the stimulated neutron decay.
FIGURE 12. A representation of the neutron synthesis from a proton and an electron as permitted by hadronic mechanics, via the representation of the actual shape and dimension of the proton. In this case an electron approaching with the threshold kinetic energy of 0.78 MeV (the rest energy difference between neutrons and protons) in singlet coupling can be captured by the much heavier proton, thus converting its original kinetic energy in an orbital motion without any violation of any conservation or other physical law [so a neutrino is unneeded].
FIGURE 13. A schematic view of the complementary process, the spontaneous decay of the neutron, in which the electron becomes free because of tunnel or other effects, thus converting its angular momentum into linear motion, again, without violating any physical law.
FIGURE 14. When nucleons in a nucleus are abstracted as points, the hypothesis of the neutrino is necessary to explain the rather large differences in kinetic energy assumed by the electrons. In this case it is assumed that the remaining energy is carried by the neutrino. However, the abstraction of nucleons in nuclei as point is a purely political posture motivated to serve organized academic interests on old doctrines. Once nucleons in a nucleus are represented as they actually are, extended particles, then the neutrino hypothesis is no longer needed because the kinetic energy carried by the emitted electron becomes a direct function of the angle of emission of the electron with respect to the local tangent. In this case we have maximal energy when the electron happens to be emitted in the perpendicular direction, with kinetic energy decreasing with the angle of emission due to the Coulomb interactions of the negatively charged electron with the positively charged protons of the nuclei. In this case the missing energy is absorbed by the nucleus itself and released via nuclear oscillations and other means.
Harry Costas
Re: Hadronic Mechanics Revolution
G'day
mharratsc said
I don't see how this "Chiral-particle Approach to Hadrons in an Extended Chiral ($sigma,pi,omega$) Mean-Field Model" deals with redshift in the EM spectrum except by implication.
Maybe you should resarch more on the topic.
Cosmology and Cosmogony in a Cyclic Universe Authors: Jayant V. Narlikar, Geoffrey Burbidge, R.G. Vishwakarma (Submitted on 18 Jan 2008)
Abstract: In this paper we discuss the properties of the quasi-steady state cosmological model (QSSC) developed in 1993 in its role as a cyclic model of the universe driven by a negative energy scalar field. We discuss the origin of such a scalar field in the primary creation process first described by F. Hoyle and J. V. Narlikar forty years ago. It is shown that the creation processes which takes place in the nuclei of galaxies are closely linked to the high energy and explosive phenomena, which are commonly observed in galaxies at all redshifts. The cyclic nature of the universe provides a natural link between the places of origin of the microwave background radiation (arising in hydrogen burning in stars), and the origin of the lightest nuclei (H, D, He$^3$ and He$^4$). It also allows us to relate the large scale cyclic properties of the universe to events taking place in the nuclei of galaxies. Observational evidence shows that ejection of matter and energy from these centers in the form of compact objects, gas and relativistic particles is responsible for the population of quasi-stellar objects (QSOs) and gamma-ray burst sources in the universe. In the later parts of the paper we briefly discuss the major unsolved problems of this integrated cosmological and cosmogonical scheme. These are the understanding of the origin of the intrinsic redshifts, and the periodicities in the redshift distribution of the QSOs.
Later I will post the various mechanisms of creating redshift by intinsic properties of compact matter.
As for a cyclic process, maybe you should do a bit of research on photodisintergration and quantum memory. Via electromagnetic reconnection matter is changed to Neutrons, these Neutrons are compacted into dense cores found in stars and AGN. The phase transition that these Neutrons to Quarks of various types is probably the most important research to date.
As for faith and nonsense I do not go there since I can back it by science papers.
Authors: D. Blaschke, T. Klahn, R. Lastowiecki, F. Sandin (Submitted on 5 Feb 2010 (v1), last revised 19 Mar 2010 (this version, v3))
Abstract: We discuss a Nambu--Jona-Lasinio (NJL) type quantum field theoretical approach to the quark matter equation of state with color superconductivity and construct hybrid star models on this basis. It has recently been demonstrated that with increasing baryon density, the different quark flavors may occur sequentially, starting with down-quarks only, before the second light quark flavor and at highest densities also the strange quark flavor appears. We find that color superconducting phases are favorable over non-superconducting ones which entails consequences for thermodynamic and transport properties of hybrid star matter. In particular, for NJL-type models no strange quark matter phases can occur in compact star interiors due to mechanical instability against gravitational collapse, unless a sufficiently strong flavor mixing as provided by the Kobayashi-Maskawa-'t Hooft determinant interaction is present in the model. We discuss observational data on mass-radius relationships of compact stars which can put constraints on the properties of dense matter equation of state.
Authors: E. B. Abdikamalov, H. Dimmelmeier, L. Rezzolla, J. C. Miller (Submitted on 10 Jun 2008)
Abstract: An increase in the central density of a neutron star may trigger a phase transition from hadronic matter to deconfined quark matter in the core, causing it to collapse to a more compact hybrid-star configuration. We present a study of this, building on previous work by Lin et al. (2006). We follow them in considering a supersonic phase transition and using a simplified equation of state, but our calculations are general relativistic (using 2D simulations in the conformally flat approximation) as compared with their 3D Newtonian treatment. We also improved the treatment of the initial phase transformation, avoiding the introduction of artificial convection. As before, we find that the emitted gravitational-wave spectrum is dominated by the fundamental quasi-radial and quadrupolar pulsation modes but the strain amplitudes are much smaller than suggested previously, which is disappointing for the detection prospects. However, we see significantly smaller damping and observe a nonlinear mode resonance which substantially enhances the emission in some cases. We explain the damping mechanisms operating, giving a different view from the previous work. Finally, we discuss the detectability of the gravitational waves, showing that the signal-to-noise ratio for current or second generation interferometers could be high enough to detect such events in our Galaxy, although third generation detectors would be needed to observe them out to the Virgo cluster, which would be necessary for having a reasonable event rate.
The extreme electromagnetic field found within the core created by densities greater than that found in the nuclear of atoms slows down the speed of electromagnetic radiation and in some extreme cases forms a trapped horizon preventing EMR from escaping, but! the dynamic properties of such matter creates dipole that ejects matter, in with the old out with the new. This intrinsic property alters the data on redshift/blueshift.
nick c
Re: Hadronic Mechanics Revolution
Harry,
I am not a physicist but I have some questions. Could you answer the questions below in a simple fashion, without referring to a bevy of papers. Was it not Einstein who said something to the effect that any scientist should be able to explain his theory to his mechanic or a waitress?
Via electromagnetic reconnection matter is changed to Neutrons,
Magnetic reconnection...how do you describe this process? are you referring to magnetic field "lines" seperating and then snapping back together? are you aware of the literature on various EU and Tbolts sites refuting the concept?
these Neutrons are compacted into dense cores found in stars and AGN. The phase transition that these Neutrons to Quarks of various types is probably the most important research to date.
How can free neutrons remain stable when not bound to an atomic nucleus? It is well known that free neutrons undergo beta decay in a matter of minutes, leaving you with a proton, electron, and antineutrino. So how can a there even exist such a creature as a neutron star, or a neutron core to a star or AGN? What is the mechanism that overides the beta decay? The papers are interesting but do they show some lab experiments depicting a mechanism whereby free neutrons are stabilized? or are they just more mathematical models based on assumptions which do not conform to reality?
these Neutrons are compacted into dense cores found in stars and AGN.
Okay, if free neutrons could exist (?) how are they compacted? are you referring to gravitational compression or some other process? What is the degree of compaction? and why would not this, theoretically at least, form a black hole? As compaction occurs why would not electrons become seperated from protons and atomic nuclei (plasma) forming a positive core which would then prevent gravtational collapse because of electrostatic repulsion, which is many orders of magnitude more powerful than gravity, between the protons? If you are not assuming a gravitational compaction....than what force is doing the compacting?
As for faith and nonsense I do not go there since I can back it by science papers.
Unfortunately, science papers can exhibit their own "faith and nonsense." Scientists have "faith" in the peer review system and papers can be highly speculative and pass into the realm of "nonsense."
Nick
mharratsc
Re: Hadronic Mechanics Revolution
@ Lloyd- the implications are staggering. No neutrinos... and it all sounds so plausible too.
@ Harry Costas- Dude, you make my brain itch.
You post stuff about chiral-symmetry from quantum field theory:
http://aps.arxiv.org/abs/1007.3630 Chiral-particle Approach to Hadrons in an Extended Chiral ($sigma,pi,omega$) Mean-Field Model
Authors: Schun T. Uechi, Hiroshi Uechi (Submitted on 21 Jul 2010 (v1), last revised 26 Jul 2010 (this version, v2))
Abstract: The chiral nonlinear ($sigma,pi,omega$) mean-field model is an extension of the conserving nonlinear (nonchiral) $sigma$-$omega$ hadronic mean-field model which is thermodynamically consistent, relativistic and Lorentz-covariant mean-field theory of hadrons. In the extended chiral ($sigma,pi,omega$) mean-field model, all the masses of hadrons are produced by chiral symmetry breaking mechanism, which is different from other conventional chiral partner models. By comparing both nonchiral and chiral mean-field approximations, the effects of chiral symmetry breaking to the mass of $sigma$-meson, coefficients of nonlinear interactions, coupling ratios of hyperons to nucleons and Fermi-liquid properties are investigated in nuclear matter, hyperonic matter, and neutron stars.
... and you imply that this entirely theoretical approach is God's Word:
"Preon particles such as Axions Anion, Higgs the most basic of all have a wave patern that allows them to group to gether and form large wave packets, its called quantum memory to eventually form quarks that form Neutrons and Protons. This process forms part of a cyclic process of matter to energy and vice versa as per E=MC^2."
... like all of this stuff is proven, observed, reproducible, and has it's own mini-series on the Discovery Channel.
When I mention that there are variables that are being overlooked (variable speed of light used in the root equation of Relativity's E=MC^2), you shoot back at me:
As for a cyclic process, maybe you should do a bit of research on photodisintergration and quantum memory. Via electromagnetic reconnection matter is changed to Neutrons, these Neutrons are compacted into dense cores found in stars and AGN. The phase transition that these Neutrons to Quarks of various types is probably the most important research to date.
As for faith and nonsense I do not go there since I can back it by science papers.
Ok...
Photodisintegration From Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaJump to: navigation, search Photodisintegration (also called Phototransmutation) is a physical process in which an extremely high energy gamma ray interacts with an atomic nucleus and causes it to enter an excited state, which immediately decays by emitting a subatomic particle. A single proton or neutron is effectively knocked out of the nucleus by the incoming gamma ray. This process is essentially the reverse of nuclear fusion, where lighter elements at high temperatures combine together forming heavier elements and releasing energy. Photodisintegration is endothermic (energy absorbing) for atomic nuclei lighter than iron and exothermic (energy releasing) for atomic nuclei heavier than iron. Photodisintegration is responsible for the nucleosynthesis of at least some heavy, proton rich elements via p-process which takes place in supernovae.
The only thing I could find on 'quantum memory' is in relation to 'quantum computing' from this article in Nature.
More theory and bad physics to boot!!! "Electromagnetic reconnection"?? That is Mainstream-Speak for an exploding double layer. You think those things are responsible for matter fissioning into neutrons. And then these neutrons get sucked into 'dense cores found in stars and AGN" which then smashes these neutrons into component quarks...
Ya know- just because someone wrote a friggin paper on his theory doesn't make it FACT, bud! Quit talking down at people like they are not 'wise to the Universe' just because they don't subscribe to your pet theories. It's rude, ya know.
Lastly you stated:
The extreme electromagnetic field found within the core created by densities greater than that found in the nuclear of atoms slows down the speed of electromagnetic radiation and in some extreme cases forms a trapped horizon preventing EMR from escaping, but! the dynamic properties of such matter creates dipole that ejects matter, in with the old out with the new. This intrinsic property alters the data on redshift/blueshift.
You seem to imply that the core of galactic nuclei is uber-dense or something, which creates an "extreme electromagnetic field" that "slows down the speed of electromagnetic radiation" and prevents "EMR from escaping"...
So you don't think this is an externally-powered plasmoid at work here, trapping matter in a Z-pinch, storing energy in a torus... current in, current out... basically the whole Electric Universe theme in it's entirety??
Lloyd
Re: Hadronic Mechanics Revolution
MODERATORS! * Please move Harry's replies to elsewhere, where he won't keep hijacking this thread. Please.
Lloyd
Re: Hadronic Mechanics Revolution
* The following refines understanding of Santilli's findings on cosmology from http://www.neutronstructure.org/part2.htm. GRAND UNIFICATION * There is negative gravity after all ... in antimatter.
Once curvature is abandoned in favor of the broader isoflatness, the axiomatic incompatibilities existing between gravity and electroweak interactions are resolved because: isogravity possesses, at the abstract level, the same Poincare' invariance of electroweak interactions; isogravity can be formulated on the same flat isospace of electroweak theories; and isogravity admits positive energies for matter and negative energies for antimatter in the same way as it occurs for electroweak theories. An axiomatically consistent iso-grand-unification of gravitation and electroweak interaction was then proposed by R. M. Santilli
NO MISSING MASS; SMALLER UNIVERSE ... isorelativity permits a new conception of cosmology based on the ... universal invariance ... in which there is no need for the "missing mass" (as indicated earlier), time and the speed of light become local variables, and the detected universe has a dimension considerably smaller than that currently believed (because some of the cosmological redshift is due to the decrease of the speed of light in chromospheres, rather than to the speed of quasars). Also, at the limit case of equal distribution of matter and antimatter in the universe, isocosmology predicts that the universe has identically null total energy, identically null total time, and identically null other physical characteristics, thus permitting mathematical studies of its creation} (because of the lack of singularities at its formation). AGE OF UNIVERSE = 0? [because of antimatter time canceling matter time.] * More cosmology from http://www.neutronstructure.org/part3.htm.
... The lack of sufficient information on the expected antimatter component of the universe has major negative implications for virtually all studies in astrophysics and cosmology. As an illustration, current studies on the "age of the universe" may result to have no physical meaning because, in the event of equal amounts of matter and antimatter, the age of the universe could be identically null. This is due to the fact that, to avoid the inconsistency in quantization indicated earlier, the sign of all physical characteristics of particles must be changed, including time. The null total time of the universe for an equal distribution of matter and antimatter then follows. At best we could consider the age of the matter branch of the universe. However, this notion too may result to be fundamentally untenable if the prediction of isorelativity regarding the dependence of local isotime from mass AND density is correct. In this case a more consistent study would be that of the "average" age of the "matter" branch of the universe, or, separately, of the antimatter branch. ... A) The universe is expanding ... because of the matter-antimatter gravitational repulsion, although at a rate much smaller than that of current beliefs; B) The dimension of the universe is a fraction of that currently believed [The universe is much smaller than thought.] because of the cosmological redshift created by the decrease of the speed of light in astrophysical chromospheres, as well as the fact that space itself becomes a physical medium at intergalactic distances, thus causing an additional cosmological redshift, particularly for far away galaxies and quasars; C) At the limit of equal amounts of matter and antimatter in the universe, the total time of the universe is identically null, while local times depend on the mass and density (local isotime) and are generally different for different astrophysical bodies even when they have the same mass but different sizes/densities; D) At the limit of equal amounts of matter and antimatter, all other characteristics of the universe, such as total energy, total linear momentum, etc. are also identically null, thus avoiding any singularity at the creation of the universe, and permitting quantitative studies for the act of creation itself;
* The above clears up my previous confusion from when Santilli said the universe is not expanding and that it is expanding. It's expanding much more slowly than thought, if there is an equal or nearly equal amount of antimatter as matter in the universe, of which celestial bodies consist.
... At the limit, these revisions are such to permit the complete interpretation of the cosmological redshift of galaxies as being of isotopic type, in which case the galaxies can be at rest with respect to us and to each other. The author does not favor this solution because, in the event part of the universe is made up of antimatter, its expansion is inevitable based on current knowledge.
FIGURE 22: A schematic view of the Santilli-Shillady isochemical model of the water molecule that has achieved, for the first time, an exact representation of all molecular characteristics without adulteration of the basic axioms of hadronic chemistry (125,126,59). The model is too complex to be reviewed in this page. An intriguing aspect is that, while the water molecule is only one for quantum chemistry, for the covering hadronic chemistry the same molecule may acquire a variety of different configurations with different physical and, therefore, chemical properties, mostly as yet unexplored. This confirms that our quantitative understanding of water, rather than having reached a final character, is just at its initiation.
FIGURE 1: A schematic view of the first fundamental insufficiency of quantum mechanics in nuclear physics, the inability to represent the stability of the deuteron. Since the neutron is inherently unstable with a mean life when in vacuum of about 15 minutes, the deuteron should decay into two protons, an electron and the conjectural antineutrino. Contrary to this theoretical prediction, the deuteron is permanently stable, while no quantitative explanation of the stability of the deuteron has been achieved via quantum mechanics in about one century of research. Quite embarrassing insufficiency of quantum mechanics occurs for heavier nuclei due to the complete inability to explain why the neutron is stable for certain nuclei, why the neutron is instead unstable for other nuclei, and, above all, why the mean life of the neutron can vary from nucleus to nucleus from nanoseconds to millions of years. ... the second fundamental insufficiency of quantum mechanics in nuclear physics, the inability to represent the spin 1 of the ground state of the deuteron. ... a third fundamental insufficiency of quantum mechanics in nuclear physics, the inability to achieve an exact representation of the total magnetic moment of the deuteron.
FIGURE 4: A schematic view of yet another fundamental implication of the Rutherford-Santilli neutron (Part V), according to which the deuteron is composed of a three-body bound state of two protons and one electron verifying the laws of hadronic mechanics. As shown below, this structure model of the deuteron first presented in Ref. (58), Part IV, achieves for the first time in nuclear physics an exact and invariant representation of ALL characteristics of the deuteron, including stability, spin, magnetic moment, etc. Note the conditions of mutual penetration of the constituents with corresponding contact nonpotential forces and related nonunitary effects whose only known invariant formulation is that permitted by hadronic mechanics. The above view should be compared with the conventional proton-neutron structure of the deuteron in Figure III.12 that is evidently recovered in first approximation by the hadronic model of this figure.
* The following may support Allyn's theory stated in another thread last year or so about [a neutron-proton "dance"] a neutron in a nucleus becoming a proton, while an adjacent proton becomes a neutron, because of the confined electron moving from one to another within a nucleus. See the thread here: http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3~. We were actually discussing deuterium and deuterons.
FIGURE 6: A schematic view of the representation of proton-neutron exchange according to model (2.1). It is given by the the isoprobability that the electron is 50% of the time inside one proton and 50% inside the other proton. Since the two protons are mutually overlapping (Figure 4), this implies a oo-shaped orbit, with one o-branch inside one proton and the other o-branch inside the other. In turn, such a oo-shaped orbit provides the final interpretation of the stability of the deuteron. The reader should be aware that this oo-shaped orbits occurs also for the new strong valence force, namely for the mechanism according to which valence pairs strongly bond atoms together as in the case of the H2 molecule (see Part VII and monograph (59)).
