markcreekwater

I WRITE ESSAYs

CHAPTER 2: WHAT DO PROTONs LOOK LIKE ??

CHAPTER 2:  WHAT DO PROTONs LOOK LIKE ??

“TO UNDERSTAND HOW PROTONs WORK, one needs to keep a sense of awe and wonder in one’s heart + mind … plus, it helps to realize that the standard model is, to say it politely, not quite right”   —–MARK CREEK-WATER DORAZIO, ApE (amateur physics-enthusiast)

BASICLY, Dr. ERNEST STERNGLASS says that the proton is composed of 4 [four] electron-positron PAIRs,  plus an unpaired positron-at-the-center of the proton … He says that each of the 4 ep-pairs carries a strong magnetic field, analogous to planet-earth’s magnetic field …

Please NOTE that much of the first half of this chapter is re preliminary information which might help one to appreciate + understand Sternglass’s life’s work, which he spent developing his proton-model … If one wants a quick description of the model, then one can skip “down” to the section with the heading “Dr. STERNGLASS’s PROTON-MODEL ??” …

AS YOU READ THIS ESSAY,  PLEASE KEEP IN MIND THAT it now seems that, in our universe, there is really only one physical entity, ENERGY … As a recent book-writer expressed this idea,  “everything … anything you hold … no matter how dense, how heavy, how large, on its most fundamental level boils down to a collection of electric charges interacting with a background sea of electromagnetic and other energy fields — a kind of electromagnetic drag force … mass [is] not equivalent to energy;  mass [IS] energy … more fundamentally, there is no mass … there is only charge” [from the book The Field (2002), by LYNNE McTAGGART, p.33] [Ref.#7] 

PLEASE ALSO NOTE THAT what McTaggart calls “a background sea of electromagnetic and other fields” is, no doubt, due entirely to the existence of the EPOLA [electron-positron lattice] of Dr. MENAHEM SIMHONY’s “epola model of space” [Ref.#2],  if it exists;  or to some OTHER kind of aether-like substance …

So:  what DO protons look like ??  This is an important question, because, by weight, most of the “ordinary” stuff in our universe consists of protons and neutrons … By weight, moons + planets + stars + galaxies are mostly composed of various combinations of protons + neutrons … One would think that physicists would have a good idea re what protons look like;  in fact they do not:  it is a HISTORICAL FACT that, since the 1930s, the folks who developed the “standard model” have taught grad-students in physics departments, world-wide, that the standard model provides no capability to visualize what tiny things actually LOOK like, tho it does provide some powerful math-tools to describe their behavior …

THE STANDARD MODEL ??

This is the common name for the physics theories which are generally accepted by the physics community … In addition to lacking a good way to visualize the proton, and other tiny objects, standard model believers believe in so called “quarks”, which have NEVER BEEN OBSERVED IN A PHYSICS-LAB [pp. 323-324, Ref.#17] … When it became evident that they were not able to find any “quarks” inside protons or neutrons, or any other tiny objects, particle physicists modified quark-theory in a hopeful attempt to explain why … Even tho MURRAY GELL-MANN, who introduced “quark-theory” during the 1960s, said at that time that he was not totally sure that “quarks” actually exist … Details in APPENDIX8 …

Here is how a current book-writer describes the standard model:  “like an aging movie-star  whose best work is decades old  whose flaws once seemed slight  but are now becoming glaring” [p.298, Ref. #12] …

In addition to not being able to VISUALIZE what protons look like, the standard model also DENIES the existence of “aether” or “ether” or ANY KIND OF ETHER-LIKE SUBSTANCE in our universe …

Dr. MENAHEM SIMHONY [Ref.#2] begs to differ:  his “Electron-Positron Lattice Model of Space” provides a clear + realistic description of a substance which is similar to, and also quite different from, the ether or aether in which many of the heavy-hitters of 19th century physics believed —– including MAXWELL + FARADAY, when physics was called “natural philosophy” …

SIMHONY PREFERs that we call this stuff EPOLA, not ether or aether, because it’s substantially different from the “aether” of 19th century science … “EPOLA” is short for “electron-positron lattice”:  Simhony says that an ocean of electrons + positrons permeates our universe without filling it, like a very very large 3-dimensional fish-net, and inter-penetrates all the ordinary matter in our universe … he says that the elements which compose this EPO-LATTICE, (as I refer to it in these essays), are arranged in a cubic-lattice structure, [“face-centered cubic”], and so near to each other that more than a TRILLION of them occupy the space which a single hydrogen atom also occupies … How can they occupy the same space ??  Easy:  it’s because ATOMs ARE MOSTLY EMPTY SPACE !!  The only part of a hydrogen atom —(or any other kind of atom)— which has a problem sharing space with the elements which compose the epo-lattice is the NUCLEUS, and most of THOSE little rascals are so small that they can easily go between two of the elements which compose the epola …

{[ A LARGE nucleus, like that of uranium or plutonium, is more at-risk to SPLIT INTO TWO PIECEs —(i.e., to experience “FISSION”)— because, as Dr. Simhony notes, it’s just simply too large to easily go between 2 epola-elements ]} 

The main difference between the EPOLA of Simhony’s model and the AETHER of Maxwell + Faraday is this:  M. and F. believed that their “aether” was thin and wispy (ie, “aetheric” or “aethereal”), while info on the “SIMHONY TRIBUTE” web-site says that his “epola” is “STIFFER THAN A DIAMOND” … The reason why we feel almost no resistance as we move thru it is because the spaces between the elements which compose it are JUST THE RIGHT SIZE for the nucleus of an atom to pass between them …

In other words:  the nuclei of all the atoms in our physical bodies are always passing between the elements which compose the EPO-LATTICE … Simhony says that this is why accelerating objects feel INERTIA:  there’s always a small amount of “drag” — because the nuclei in an accelerating body are always interacting with epola-elements …

{[ PLEASE  NOTE  that a substance can be BOTH “stiff” AND “elastic” … i.e., there is no contradiction between these 2 words … FOR EXAMPLE: a billiard-ball is “stiff” — but will deform to a slightly non-spherical shape, when an other billiard-ball hits it, so that they bounce apart, rather than shatter … A barn-door is “stiff” — but if one throws a rock at it, it will deform slightly, then bounce back, so that the rock, too, bounces back … In each case, the fact that the object deforms AND then bounces back is evidence that it is “ELASTIC” ]} …

Simhony says that, in addition to transmitting all the ELECTROMAGNETIC SIGNALs which travel thru SPACE, the epola is also responsible for GRAVITY … But that, as one can say, is “beyond the scope of this book” … For details, go to Simhony’s internet-sites + his published books [Refs. #2, 2a, 2b, 2c] … HINT:  gravity doesn’t PULL — it PUSHES !!

By affirming the existence of an aether-like substance, (“epola”, meaning “electron-positron lattice”), which inter-penetrates all the “ordinary” matter in our universe, Dr. Simhony’s “electron-positron lattice model of space” provides a near-perfect complement to Dr. Sternglass’s “electron-positron pair model of matter” …

Tho the two gentlemen never collaborated, they produced 2 models of our universe which support + affirm each other … [It seems that, as an old saying states:  “GREAT MINDs THINK ALIKE” !!] … In the next section, I will describe Sternglass’s PROTON-MODEL, and my modification of it … Plus, I’ll describe Simhony’s EPOLA-MODEL and my modification of it …

Please read more if any of this interests you !!

Dr. STERNGLASS’s PROTON-MODEL ??

By the mid-1950s  —(approx. 10 years before MURRAY GELL-MANN published quark-theory)—  Sternglass was aware that the proton  “had a complex structure, unlike the electron” [p.114, Ref.#1] … At that time he was working with ROBERT HOFSTADTER, who was in charge of the 150-feet-long linear particle accelerator at Stanford University … {Hofstadter actually won a Nobel prize for this research, in 1961, several years before the “quark” model appeared} … SETH NEDDERMEYER, who helped CARL ANDERSON “discover” the MU-MESON (muon) in 1936, was also there …

Sternglass says that their accelerator (at Stanford University) was one of the first machines with enough power “to begin to disclose the size and structure of the proton” [p.113, Ref.#1] … They found inside the proton several distinct sources of electric charges, and MAGNETIC fields, too, which convinced them that the proton (and the neutron, too) is a “complex” object —– most likely composed of simpler, more fundamental, objects, such as electrons + positrons:  “An electron-positron structure for the proton is … strongly suggested by the fact that, whenever protons are seen to annihilate with oppositely charged anti-protons in the laboratory, the short-lived mesons that are produced always decay into electrons and positrons, together with various forms of radiation, but never into fractional charges” [p.7, Ref.#1]

Since the 1950s, Sternglass devoted many years, mainly during his free time, to develop a clear + realistic PROTON-MODEL … It’s on p.250 in his book [Ref.#1] …

Basically, he says that the proton is composed of 4 [four] electron-positron PAIRs,  plus an unpaired positron-at-the-center of the proton … He says that each of the 4 ep-pairs carries a strong magnetic-field, analogous to planet-earth’s magnetic field … I call the 4 ep-pairs “PROTON-ELEMENTs” — to distinguish them from “EPOLA-ELEMENTs”, which are an important part of Simhony’s model [Ref.#2] …

ON p.250, Ref.#1,  Sternglass’s proton-model appears as a schematic diagram … It looks like an upper-case letter “H” … The 4 ep-pairs are on the outside corners of the “H”,  while the horizontal cross-piece at the center of the “H” represents the positron at the proton’s center …

In my modification of Sternglass’s proton-model, the proton’s “H” shape is slightly TWISTED, forming a slightly more 3-dimensional object — more like a TETRAHEDRON …

I  visualize the proton as a tetrahedron-shaped object, inside one of the CUBE-SHAPED epola-cells in Simhony’s model [Ref.#2] … I visualize a proton causing the epola-cell to expand, by interfering with the magnetic forces which hold the lattice together … So each of the eight [8] elements which define the epola-cell move outwardly, away from the proton’s center … One can visualize the proton as always “plucking at the corners” of the epola-cell in which it’s located [Ref.#3], due to MAGNETIC forces between proton-elements and epola-elements …

{ NOTE:  in my model, the four [4] PROTON-ELEMENTs (which carry most of the mass of the proton) interact MAGNETICLY with the eight [8] EPOLA-ELEMENTs which compose the epola-cell in which the proton is located:  epola-elements are much smaller + less massive than proton-elements, but more DENSE:  [more details in APPENDIX9] … Of course, because the proton never stands still, but always moves from one epola-cell to an other to an other,  it’s always interacting with different epola-elements, as it moves from one epola-cell to the next one:  usually it moves slowly, so that there are no complicating “relativistic” effects } …

So this is a very simple and very interesting geometrical situation:  a TETRAHEDRON inside a CUBE … And yes, I promise that there will eventually be a schematic diagram to help illustrate this …

PLUS:  I visualize the possibility that the proton’s four [4] proton-elements might be what holds the positron-at-the-center in place, thru the phenomenon of “MAGNETIC TRAPPING” —– similar to what experimental physicists have done in physics labs [Refs. #21, #22, #23] … { NOTE: each proton-element carries a strong magnetic field, analogous to planet-earth’s magnetic field } …

There’s an excellent illustration of magnetic trapping posted on a wall in the physics building at the University of Delaware, where I was many years ago a student, and I promise that there will eventually be an illustration here in the book, to help illustrate “magnetic trapping”

{[ IN STERNGLASS’s MODEL, each ep-pair consists of an electron + a positron, which ROTATE or ORBIT around each other at almost the speed of light … ( ALTERNATIVELY,  if the idea of tiny “particles” moving around+around+around at almost the speed of light seems too weird, then one can visualize these systems as very high-frequency ELECTRICAL OSCILLATIONs ) … Each electron and positron also SPINs as it orbits:  Sternglass says that they spin in opposite directions, so that their magnetic fields align, and in fact ADD … that’s why each ep-pair carries a strong magnetic field ]} …
 

{[ DR. DAVID LaPOINT has posted some good videos, at http://www.YOUTUBE.com, re these dual magnetic-[mag’ic]-fields:  almost like “magic”, they help explain some of the current outstanding mysteries in astrophysics + astronomy + cosmology:  KEY WORDs to view these youtube videos:  “PRIMER FIELDS” ]} …

PROTON-ELEMENTs INTERACT MAGNETICALLY [MAG’IC-LY] WITH EPOLA-ELEMENTs

In my modification and blending of Simhony’s and Sternglass’s models, each of the eight epola-elements which define an epola-cell carries a strong magnetic field, while Sternglass says that proton-elements also carry a strong magnetic field … So the little rascals interact thru their magnetic fields:  like toy magnets hanging on strings, epola-elements “automatically” SWIVEL toward the nearest proton-element, to maximize their magnetic attraction …

This swiveling of epola-elements is what constitutes a magnetic field, as Einstein explains:  “the magnetic field is a potential state [of the ether]” —–from the web-site at: http://www.straco.ch/papers/Einstein%20First%20Paper.pdf …

Simhony says that the epola [“epo-lattice”] consists of individual electrons + positrons,  but that is not the model which I present here … In my modification of Simhony’s model, I visualize each epola-element as an electron-positron PAIR, instead of as an individual electron or positron …

Simhony says that electric forces between + among epola-elements keep the lattice stable:  in my modification of his model, it’s mainly MAGNETIC forces which stabilize the epo-lattice … Magnetically  {[MAG’IC-LY — almost like “MAGIC”]}:  if one wants to “GET” how protons work, then it’s important to keep a sense of awe + wonder in one’s heart + mind … For example:  perhaps magnetic forces are the FUNDAMENTAL forces in our universe;  i.e., perhaps all forces are manifestations of the magnetic force …

Because the epo-lattice permeates our universe, EPOLA-elements are everywhere in our universe, while PROTON-elements are, by comparison, few and far between … Tho proton-elements are larger + more massive than epola-elements, both are composed of nothing but electron-positron pairs, if my modification of Simhony’s model is correct … More details in CHAPTER 5 + APPENDIX 9 …

PLEASE KEEP IN MIND THAT it now seems that, in our universe, there is really only one physical entity, ENERGY … As a recent book-writer expressed this idea,  “everything … anything you hold … no matter how dense, how heavy,how large, on its most fundamental level boils down to a collection of electric charges interacting with a background sea of electromagnetic and other energy fields — a kind of electromagnetic drag force … Mass [is] not equivalent to energy;  mass [IS] energy … More fundamentally, there is no mass … There is only charge” [from the book THE FIELD (2002), by LYNNE McTAGGART, p.33] [Ref.#7] …

Please also note that what the book-writer calls “a background sea of electromagnetic and other fields” is due entirely to the existence of the EPO-LATTICE of SIMHONY’s “epola model of space”, if it exists;  or to some OTHER kind of “aether” or aether-like stuff …

In the next chapter,  I present a varbal description of the proton model which I offer:  hope-fully it’s simple enough + clear enough for a bright 10-year-old science-student to understand, as Einstein recommended that a theory or model should be …..

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ << END OF CHAPTER 2 >> $$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Advertisements

One comment on “CHAPTER 2: WHAT DO PROTONs LOOK LIKE ??

  1. Pingback: BOOK-TITLE: HOW PROTONs WORK: ESSAYS RE THE WORK OF DR. ERNEST STERNGLASS + DR. MENAHEM SIMHONY | markcreekwater

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Information

This entry was posted on December 2, 2014 by .
%d bloggers like this: