© Lloyd

1. http://milesmathis.com/charge2.html  (What is "Charge"?)
2. *In my UFT paper [] I showed that what we have always called the gravitational field at the macro-level is in fact a compound field that includes both gravity and the "charge" field.
3. Newton's gravity equation can be expanded, with G as the transform between the two fields.
4. Once we re-expand the equation, we find that "mass" is hiding two separable features, and that one of them goes to one field and one goes to the other.
5. *Specifically, if we write mass as density x volume, the volume goes to the gravitational field and the density goes to the charge field (or what I call the foundational E/M field).
6. *Gravity is no longer dependent on density; it is proportional to volume or radius, and nothing else.
7. *Density is important only in the E/M field.
8. The way that all this impacts the problem of charge is that we can now re-define the charge field as a bombarding field only.
9. It is always repulsive; never attractive.
10. It is caused by radiation of these messenger photons, which I am going to re-dub B-photons (for bombarding photons).
11. The repulsion is caused by an old-fashioned force by contact.
12. Of course this means that the B-photons are not virtual: they have energy, mass equivalence, and even radius.
13. http://milesmathis.com/double.html (The Double Slit Experiment)
14. I have proved in several previous papers that the charge field, if defined mechanically, must have mass equivalence.
15. If it has mass equivalence, it must have materiality.
16. *In other words, the field that mediates the charge between proton and electron must be made up of discrete particles itself.
17. What is now called the messenger photon cannot be a virtual particle with no mass or energy.
18. It must be a real particle and create a real field.
19. In my most recent paper on this subject I have already given this messenger photon a new name (the B-photon) and a definite radius (G times the hydrogen radius),
20. http://milesmathis.com/charge.html (Electrical Charge)
21. we are taken back to the spin of the elementary particles in the repulsing objects.
22. It would appear that the spin causes the ejection or radiation.
23. This would mean that charge is caused by spin; but charge is not spin.
24. *Charge is the mass or momentum of the ejected gas or radiation [of photons].
25. http://milesmathis.com/stack.html (HOW TO BUILD A NUCLEUS without a Strong Force)
26. *The first postulate is that the E/M field is caused by an emission field.
27. *Protons must be emitting something in order to create the repulsion.
28. *The second postulate is that quanta are spinning.
29. In fact, I have already shown that baryons (protons and neutrons) have four stacked spins.
30. These stacked spins are fully capable of explaining all the characteristics now given to quarks, without a quark model.
31. It is these spins which will allow me to build the nucleus without the strong force.
32. To begin, we will look only at the outer or z-spin of the baryon.
33. The proton and neutron are both spinning, and since they are approximately the same size, their z-spins will have approximately the same angular momentum.
34. What makes the two particles so different is that the proton is emitting a charge field and the neutron is not.
35. The neutron is swallowing its charge field, since the photons cannot navigate the maze of spins.
36. *The four spins of the neutron bring the photons back to the center, while the four spins of the proton allow the photons to escape.
37. I have diagrammed this in previous papers.
38. What this means for our analysis here is that the proton must be treated as an extended particle, while the neutron is treated as a discrete particle.
39. In other words, in this first part of the analysis, the neutron is treated mainly as a z-spin, while the proton is treated as a z-spin plus the shell of emitted photons.
40. http://milesmathis.com/elecpro.html (Unifying the Electron and Proton)
41. My explanation begins by importing theory from my paper on superposition.
42. *There I showed that the mysteries of light motion and interaction could be explained by stacked spins, each spin outside the gyroscopic influence of inner spins.
43. I showed the existence of four spins, of relative size 1,2,4, and 8, each orthogonal to neighboring spins.
44. In other words, most photons are spinning every way they can spin, axially and in the x, y, and z planes.
45. *In my paper on QCD, I applied this to baryons, showing that baryons also had all possible spins.
46. In that paper I unified the proton and the neutron, showing that the difference between the two is only a difference in z-spin.
47. That is, the particle at the center of every baryon is the same.
48. Only the spins are different.
49. I will show in a subsequent paper how this applies to mesons as well.
50. Mesons are these same baryons stripped of outer spins.
51. This unifies all hadrons.
52. In this paper, I will show that the electron is also this same baryon stripped of outer spins.
53. In this way, I will prove that electrons, mesons, neutrons and protons are all the same fundamental particle.
54. The electron with all spins has an energy of 16,385.
55. The electron with no spin has an energy of 1.
56. The electron with axial spin has an energy of 9.
57. If we divide 16,385 by 9 we get 16,385/9 = 1820.56
58. We may therefore deduce that the electron at rest is spinning only about its own axis.
59. An electron with all possible stable spins is a proton, anti-proton, or neutron.
60. An electron with no z-spin is a meson.
61. This number is very close to the atomic mass unit or Dalton which has a value of 1822.
62. My margin of error may be explained by the presence of the gravitational field at the quantum level, but I will save that analysis for another paper.
63. I will be asked how the electron can show a wave motion with only an axial spin.
64. I have already shown that the wave characteristic of matter and of light is caused by stacked spins.
65. But here we have only the first spin.
66. How is the wave expressed?
67. Well, it isn't expressed by an electron at rest, and we are comparing rest masses here.
68. The electron must be moving to express a wave.
69. If the electron begins moving and expresses a wave, of course it must have a second spin.
70. It must get this spin from collision, we assume.
71. And this second spin will add to the energy and therefore the apparent mass of the electron.
72. A moving electron will become a sort of stable meson.
73. As you can see from the math above, we can predict that it will have an energy about 7.2 times (65/9) that of the electron at rest.
74. So in the first instance, the moving electron is not gaining energy only from Relativity.
75. It is primarily gaining energy from x-spin.
76. http://milesmathis.com/photon.html (Unifying the Photon with other quanta)
77. The [photon] mass should be proportional to the energy, but the energy is determined by both a and x-spins.
78. The a-spin corresponds to the radius, but the x-spin is twice the a-spin.
79. So, we have found a mass of the photon of 2.77 x 10^-37kg.
80. From a previous paper, we know that the radius of the photon must be G times the proton radius, which gives us 2.74 x 10^-24m.
81. Because if we use my simple equation from my first paper on G (relating mass and radius to surface acceleration), we get a = 4mG/r^2 = 9.8m/s^2
82. The photon, like the proton and the Earth, has a local acceleration at its surface of 9.8!
83. I have shown that the photon is two full levels below the electron and three levels below the proton.
84. Why don't we find a stable particle with a mass 1/1821 that of the electron mass, which would be 5 x 10^-34 kg?
85. If that were a photon, it would have an energy of 4.5 x 10^-17 J, and a frequency of 6.8 x 10^16/s.
86. So the answer is, we do have a stable particle at that mass equivalence: it is just an ultraviolet photon.
87. As the photon gather[s] spins, it stops acting like a simple particle with linear motion and starts acting like a little engine.
88. The spins allow it to trap other photons.
89. Specifically, the z-spin is orthogonal to the linear motion, which allows it to act like a scoop or an intake valve.
90. Photons with only axial spin cannot resist this intake, and they are temporarily absorbed by the photon with z-spin.
91. *Intake of small photons begins to slow the large photon and it begins to turn into an electron.
92. *It gains mass and loses velocity.
93. *At some point it takes its fill of small photons and they start to spill out once more.
94. The large photon has become an engine, driven by small photons.
95. It is now an electron.
96. This photon exhaust of this little engine is what we call charge.
97. *If you have enough of this exhaust, it begins to directionalize the residual photon wind, and this photon wind is what we call electricity.
98. The spin of the photon wind is what we call magnetism.
99. http://milesmathis.com/magneton.html (The Bohr Magneton and Bohr's second and third biggest mistakes)
100. Finally, let's check that value for the electron radius.
101. Actually, what I found [before] is the radius of the outer spin.
102. The electron in orbit has both an axial spin and an x-spin.
103. Therefore the radius of the electron proper is: r.e = 1.12 x 10^-17m
104. But the x-spin radius, 2.24 x 10^-17m, must be the effective border of the electron, since due to the end-over-end spin, the mass will inhabit this entire radius, during motion.
105. In another paper, I found the radius of the proton to be about 10^-13m, and the proton is known to have a mass of about 1836 times the electron.
106. Using those numbers, we get r = 5.45 x 10^-17m Which is very close.
107. We can use my number to re-estimate the radius for the proton, assuming it has the same density as the electron.
108. r.P = 4.11 x 10^-14m

'13-08-03, 18:16CORRECTING HADRONIZATION