 |
There are currently, 162 guest(s) and 0 member(s) that are online.
You are Anonymous user. You can register for free by clicking here
| |
| |
Scientists Rethink Strong Force
Posted on Tuesday, May 06, 2003 @ 23:07:04 GMT by vlad
|
|
matt writes: A new subatomic particle has scientists questioning the fundamental force that keeps atoms together.
According to an article in Nature, scientists discovered a new subatomic particle and are now re-thinking the strong force that keeps atoms together.
The particle is an unusual combination of quarks, but researchers say its becoming less unusual to discover new particles. Researchers add that there are catalogues full of new particles and quark combinations.
You can find the entire article here:. (
http://www.nature.com/nsu/030428/030428-18.html
)
|
| |
|
Don't have an account yet? You can create one. As a registered user you have some advantages like theme manager, comments configuration and post comments with your name.
| |
Average Score: 5
Votes: 1
| |
|
|
No Comments Allowed for Anonymous, please register |
|
FROM QUASARS TO QUARKS: THE UNIFIED FIELD EQUATION (Score: 1)
by vlad on Wednesday, May 07, 2003 @ 01:14:10 GMT
(User Info | Send a Message) http://www.zpenergy.com | From the "aias_discuss" yahoo group. Myron W. Evans (AIAS Director) recovered from his illness and has recently submitted a paper to the "Foundations of Physics Letters" on a new unified field equation. Here are some relevant extracts from recent posts on that list for those who undesrtand this things better than me:-):
....
FROM QUASARS TO QUARKS: THE UNIFIED FIELD EQUATION
However, my new equations greatly simplify general relativity, and goes back to its roots in
1915 (Hilbert and Einstein, almost the same time).
..........
The wave function is also determinisitc and not probabilistic. This was and is the view point of Einstein, Schrodinger , de Broglie, Bohm, Vigier and many others.
...........
I think that there should be a consistency here if we dig deep enough, my new wave equation is based on geometry, which of course treats space-time geometrically.
The wave equation also predicts that gluons have a tiny mass, like the photon, and a photon may actually be made up of gluons. The standard model usually asserts that gluons and photons are massless, but the wave equation shows that there can be no massless particles in curved space-time. The weak field bosons are massive.
It would be interesting to consider a model of the photon as composed of a gluon current. If the (O) electrodynamics wave equation holds, as it should, then the creation of all particles from vacuum should be associated with non-vanishing magnetic current. This would lend support for the formerly discarded Georgi-Glashow electroweak model based on SO(3), [i.e., There is probably no weak force - meaning it is derived from higher symmetry electrodynamics. Similar arguments could be made for the standard model and the strong force by induction.]
..........
Message: 1 Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 10:17:55 EDT From: EMyrone@a
Subject: FPL For www.aias.us an LANL archives, fourth part of lecture 2
I would like to ask AIAS Webmaster Bob Gray to put the attached file lecture2d.pdf on to http://www.aias.us and the LANL archives. It is the fourth part of the second lecture of my forthcoming book for World Scientific: "Lecture Notes in O(3) Electrodynamics", and derives most, if not all, of the well known equations of flat space-time physics from weak field limit of the Evans field equation written in the form of an eigenfunction equation, or wave equation, (2.140). The following equations are derived: the single particle wave equation, Klein Gordon, Schrodinger, Dirac, Proca, d"Alembert, Poisson equation for electrodynamics, Poisson equation for dynamics, Newton's first law, the Newtonian gravitational law, and Newton's second and third laws.
It has already been demonstrated in earlier notes that the Evans equation gives the Einstein field equation and the O(3) field equations of electrodynamics.
In addition a new equation of metric compatibility is derived in terms of the Evans metric vector q sub mu (eqn. (2.179)). This gives a new and general geometric relation between the Christoffel symbol and Evans metric vector which is not restricted by the torsion free assumption implicit in Eisnetin's gravitational general relativity. A new operator equivalence is derived between the scalar curvature and d'Alembertian in flat space-time, thus deriving wave mechanics from the Evans equation without the Born approximation and without the need for the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.
The fundamental wave equations of quantum mechanics are written in the weak field limit of the Evans field equation : eqn. (2.198) of these notes.
Overall, the Evans equation greatly simplifies general relativity and unified field theory and has been proven to give most if not all of the great equations of dynamics and electrodynamics. So it remains to tackle the problem of unification with the weak and strong fields.
For example, the equation (2.198) gives gravitational waves directly, and in a much simpler way than the standard methods, described in a contemporary book such as that by Sean Carroll ("Lecture Notes in General Relativity", Univ of California, Santa Barbara). I agree with Mendel Sachs that the B(3) field is one of the major outcomes of this unified field equation, and so the proposed electron beam inverse Faraday effect experiment at Oak Ridge assumes CENTRAL importance in unified field theory, because it would be the observation of B(3) for a circularly polarized e/m field interacting with one electron. RFR would be the one electron resonance equivalent of this effect. So the Evans equation satisfactorily explains old things (in fact the whole of known physics, without exaggeration) and predicts new things, the B(3) field and O(3) electrodynamics being two examples.
The last part of the second lecture will derive circular polarization from the Evans equation by a choice of metric vector.
..........
Message: 4 Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 11:25:59 EDT From: EMyrone@a
Subject: FPL PS
PS The wave function of quantum mechanics can now be interpreted essentially as the metric, not as a probability, which removes a lot of conceptual problems with dice playing, something that Einstein objected to. If there is no need for a probabilistic interpretation, there is no need for a Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, despite its philosophical elegance. Experimental data counter indicating the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle is given in Prof. Croca's new book, volume twenty of my Advances in Chemical Physics series, and available from www.amazon.com
I am a mix 'em and boil 'em chemist by training, and chemistry is based almost entirely on the Schrodinger equation, the Dirac equation being mentioned occasionally. During my time as visiting professor in Enrico Clementi's organization at IBM Kingston, New York, I was very impressed by the power of computational quantum chemistry during the development of the LCAP system with IBM 3090 supercomputers.. I was the initial project writer for the now well known MOTEC series by Clementi et alii, which offers books and CD's with code for any conceivable situation John Pople was awarded the chemistry Nobel Prize a couple of years ago for his work in computational quantum chemistry, almost all based on the Schrodinger equation, which is now known to be a special case of my field equation.
I have published about 650 scientific articles and produced about fifty books, including many articles in Physical Review and Physical Review Letters.
So what is and what is not mainstream physics at any given point in history is a quirk of human nature, of no interest to the quarks of nature herself.
.........
Message: 1 Date: Tue, 6 May 2003 05:12:52 EDT From: EMyrone@a
Subject: FPL : Unified wave equation, magnetic current, e/m ex vacuo
These are very interesting remarks by Dr. Roach. In regard to the strong field Lewis Ryder has a good account on pp. 124 ff. of "Quantum Field Theory" (Cambridge Univ. Press, paperback, 1996). He shows that at one time O(3) was also a candidate for the strong field, but was discarded in favor of SU(3) because if the color group were O(3) the diquark system would be a color singlet, but diquarks have not been found in nature yet. The second reason is that O(3) does not possess asymptotic freedom if the number of flavors exceeds two, and the number of flavors is at least five. SU(3) allows up to 16 flavors.
However, SU(3) is built up from a THREE dimensional generalization of the Pauli matrices of SU(2), so SU(3) is closely related to O(3), and the internal index of SU(3) closely related to those of O(3).
I agree with Drs. Roach and Anastasovski and others that both the weak and strong fields could turn out to be manifestations of the electromagnetic field. For O(3) electrodynamics the THREE internal indices ((a)) of the tetrad run from (1) to (3), for the weak field the internal index gives the THREE massive weak field bosons, and for the strong field the various quarks are built up from the THREE dimensional generalization of the Pauli matrics. So we can write the tetrad in SU(3) form using these generalized Pauli matrices (Ryder, eqn. (3.180)). There are eight group generators of SU(3), and these form non-Abelian cyclic relations very similar to those appearing in O(3) electrodynamics.
In gravitation the Killing vectors form an O(3) group and so O(3) is central to all four fields. This is expressed mathematically by using upper indices ((a)) of the tetrad, as mentioned already.
The new wave equation shows that the generally covariant four-current density in O(3) electrodynamics is in general a tetrad:
j sup a sub mu = epsilon k T A sup a sub mu
where T is a scalar contraction of the stress energy momentum tensor, k is the Einstein constant, and A sup a sub mu is the O(3) potential tetrad. A magnetic current would have axial symmetry rather than polar, and the tetrad allows for this possibility. It can be seen that the current depends on the Einstein constant k, and therefore on the Newton gravitational constant. The current can be expressed either in terms of the Christoffel connection or spin affine connection.
The unified field theory shows that this current depends on non-Euclidean space-time and so it allows ELECTROMAGNETIC ENERGY TO BE EXTRACTED FROM NON-EUCLIDEAN SPACE-TIME. Using:
R = -kT
it can be seen that the electromagnetic four current density is proportional to scalar curvature R, and so electromagnetic stress energy momentum, contracted to T, produces R, which in turn produces T in a device such as the MOTIONLESS ELECTROMAGNETIC GENERATOR.
This is of course exactly analogous to gravitation in general relativity, where Newtonian force and energy are replaced by curved space-time.
Message: 3 Date: Tue, 6 May 2003 05:53:42 EDT From: EMyrone@a
Subject: FPL FPL Further Progress
Many thanks to GJE for all the kind remarks. After spending about 100 hours checking the wave equation I intend to write up the work now as a second FPL paper, because I wish to give a lot of technical detail and because the first paper is in press in FPL. I could try a short paper to Nature but this journal is notoriously quirky and conservative and tends to reject anything not based on the standard model. Most physicists (and referees and Editors of a journal such as Nature) are not aware yet of the empirical evidence for O(3) e/m reviewed in Advances in Chemical Physics vol.119. However I could try a short note to Nature later on. Found Phys Lett is far in advance of a journal such as Phys. Rev Letters.
I am not sure about Asperger's Syndrome etc, I have an easy going character and I am a clear lecturer, (by independent student assessment), so very different from Newton and Einstein in that respect. My recent illness was a reactive or single event major severe depression, caused by loss of entire family, house, job, salary, pension, benefits, and most possessions. I am normally quite cheerful but a little introspective in character, but definitely not autistic. The major severe depression was caused by bad shock, and was not a symptom of Asperger's. If one loses one's entire family, job, house and possessions, salary, pension and benefits, then one is not going to be happy. This is just common sense. In my case my career was deliberately destroyed twice, at Aberystwyth in 1983 and at UNCC in 1995.
|
|
|
|
|
