The theoretical musings continue.

It may be difficult to separate "theory" from "application," but let''s see if this helps facilitate the discussion.
User avatar
Richard Hull
Moderator
Posts: 12513
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 1:44 pm
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: The theoretical musings continue.

Post by Richard Hull » Wed Dec 10, 2003 2:52 pm

Of course there is no actual real measurment of photon exchange in the sense that you posit. It is all theoretical. We have never observed these virtual photons. They are a dreamworld construct of mathematics and what what we think or wish would happen to make theories work out and the math balance.

Differing mathematical results or results that confute theory can always be turned into equalities by the adroit mind with only a few untestable assumptions and the demanded requisite math to link them. None of this will make those thoughts reality, but it will create a marvelous framework that links what we can test with ideas we want to make into wholecloth.

We have no idea of the ORIGIN of nascent primary charge. This is electrostatic charge. Strong charge is a mathematical construct and has no testability outside of superb mathematical machinations based on an assumption of an Aether and virtual photon exchange. Zero virtual photons exchange exists in my mind due to no one have ever observed virtual photons. Yet these same items are talked about theoretically as if they are accepted science.

The unobserved and unobservable used to support the dreams of some of the sharpest mathematical minds in history.

It is truly a wonderful structure we build on assumption creating vast amounts of untestable and ultimately unknowable events 6 orders of magnitude below the genuinely observable.

What has happened is that we have hit a wall in empiricism regarding the incredibly small and modern minds see no reason to let this stop the work of physics. The very science whose name is derived, oddly enough, from the "PHYSICAL" aspect of existence. If we can't see it, touch it, measure it and make useful wheelwork from it, it is just mathematically backed metaphysical extensions of "real physics" that hit the brick wall of the heisenberg limit of laboratory observation and measurement.

So the true origns of nascent electrostatic charge are still unknowable. Strong charge is still a theoretical construct.


Richard Hull
Progress may have been a good thing once, but it just went on too long. - Yogi Berra
Fusion is the energy of the future....and it always will be
Retired now...Doing only what I want and not what I should...every day is a saturday.

User avatar
Richard Hull
Moderator
Posts: 12513
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 1:44 pm
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: The theoretical musings continue.

Post by Richard Hull » Wed Dec 10, 2003 8:44 pm

I meant to reply to Chris earlier post regarding the microscopic distributed charge for the neutron. I have read papers and seen cross sections of the charge seen across the neutron. I wish I could remember where, but there is a sinusoid of sorts with both positive and minus aspects. the negative is muted and far extended compared to the positive lobe. What i'd like to know is "how dey do dat"?

For all that, the neutron is still just a proton and an electron in my mind, but with super natural characteristics where the normal electrostatic rope limit (hydrogen atom) is lifted enough to bond the two items, if not in some tight orbit, then some stasis condition perhaps in a form of electrical singularity that is only stable in a nucleus.

I feel that naked, unit, electrostatic charge is truly indestructable in the nuclear and subnuclear sense, being forever conserved and preserved throughout the universe. The key might be the fact that in no reaction do opposite charges come together and neutralize or extinguish on a net value, universal scale.

Charge is one of the most cherished of all energies in the universe as it is a key form of potential energy which keeps the universe moving and evolving. Charge can't be transformed into energy either for it is energy, albeit purely potential in nature.

Charge, for me, is the ultimate microscopic singularity. Perhaps at the core of reality itself.

Charge is the primal item that generates all photons, all magnetic forces and creates directly or indirectly 100% of all localized material motions and dynamic energies. It is the basis for all nuclear, atomic and molecular structure.

Photons, which every one is totally in love with, are the crap of the universe..... pretty much waste, secondary product, as is magnetisim. Don't get me wrong, they are links in the evolutionary chain, but not primal or nascent in the universe.

Finally all we can say about matter is it is always associated with charge. There is no uncharged matter in the nucleus or electron shells. It is no small discovery that matter has mass and this is related to gravity. The big question, is mass/matter a separate entity from charge and the primal source of gravity? Charge, while we don't know what it is can be looked at a primal. Gravity is obviously primal or certainly appears to be as it is certainly the demanded complimentary form of potential energy in the universe needed to keep things spun up along with charge.

Could matter, as we see it, be a manifestation of a singularity from which charge and gravity are exposed or radiate? Radiate is a bad term as these are potential energies, but you get my drift.

Bottom line is that you can't produce gravity or charge from any form of energy........Another perhaps salient point

Richard Hull
Progress may have been a good thing once, but it just went on too long. - Yogi Berra
Fusion is the energy of the future....and it always will be
Retired now...Doing only what I want and not what I should...every day is a saturday.

Richard Hester
Posts: 1458
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2001 4:07 am
Real name:

Re: The theoretical musings continue.

Post by Richard Hester » Wed Dec 10, 2003 9:08 pm

Charge does get extinguished if a particle and antiparticle collide, but that's another matter....

User avatar
Richard Hull
Moderator
Posts: 12513
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 1:44 pm
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: The theoretical musings continue.

Post by Richard Hull » Wed Dec 10, 2003 10:32 pm

Not really, I have mentioned this before in at least two posts. On a universal scale no charge is lost or signs exchanged. Anti- particles, apparently and observationally, have no normal existence. They are all the results of strings of violent events where photons have been created that are not allowed (too energetic).

Before antiparticles are created there are x number of electrons in the universe and y number of protons. Regardless, at the end of all reactions and energy downshifts, all charge is restored.

balance scenario:

initial conditions......

universe has X electrons, 0 or Z positrons, your choice

problem:

High speed photon >1.2mev not allowed in and amongst matter.
Converts to two matter particles... one positron ~512 kev + one electron ~512kev

net universal: resultant charge added ZERO Net particles added TWO.
Net Universal particle identity balance X+1 electrons and 1 or Z+1 positrons.

Quickly, as the photon had to be in the thick of matter to down convert in the first place, the positron finds an electron and annihilates to a photon of energy ~512kev. The regular electron created during pair production speeds off with added energy, effectively stolen or transfered to it during pair production.

New net charge status of the universe.................
one electron stolen or lost to make the new low energy gamma ray and one electron gained during pair production.... perfect balance, The positron's positive charge had a fleeting existence between creation and annihilation. however during its entire existence, the net universal added charge was still ZERO!
So net charge production added or lost, ZERO again.

Particle balance:

(X+1) - 1 = X
for positrons 1-1 = 0 or (Z+1) -1 = Z

Net result for the universe...........................
net charge created ZERO
net particles created ZERO
new energy formed ZERO

Nothing changed for the entire universe other than a hot gamma down converteda portion of its forbidden energy to an electron. This operation can never happen again and the reduced energy photon is free to do as it wishes from this point on.

Richard Hull
Progress may have been a good thing once, but it just went on too long. - Yogi Berra
Fusion is the energy of the future....and it always will be
Retired now...Doing only what I want and not what I should...every day is a saturday.

Richard Hester
Posts: 1458
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2001 4:07 am
Real name:

Re: The theoretical musings continue.

Post by Richard Hester » Wed Dec 10, 2003 11:06 pm

The only exception to the relatively violent production of positrons via pair production is their production by positron emitting isotopes.
I agree that the overall neutrality of the universe is not affected by electon-positron annihilation, but charge and mass still are converted into uncharged photons. Apparently the photon energy is accounted for by the mass of the particles. What happened to the charge? Is the mass a consequence of the self energy of the charge? What then is the real difference between the electron and positron besides the opposite charge? If we knew the real answers to these questions we would understand the universe a little better.

User avatar
Richard Hull
Moderator
Posts: 12513
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 1:44 pm
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: The theoretical musings continue.

Post by Richard Hull » Wed Dec 10, 2003 11:27 pm

I agree totally with your final point. Charge is critical to the understanding of core universal issues.

On the drive home this evening, I mused over what I had just posted above on the balance in pair production, annihilation, and charge conservation.

I got to musing hard................

During "the total event" (pair production to annihilation) and this includes positron beta emission processes. The net universal dynamic, kinematic or EM energy changes throughout the event showing the secondary nature of the kinematic or energetic universe, (photons secondary stuff) The universe doesn't give a hoot in hell about how much energy is on hand, going or coming at any instant in time.

Likewise, the universe has a change of mass through out these events as, in the case of pair production, two new particle masses were created then destroyed. So the amount of mass in the universe is not important to remain constant or fixed.

However, at no INSTANT in time is the net charge of the universe ever imbalanced or disturbed over the entire event!!!

Again, this points out the true nature of the ultimate primal entity....CHARGE...... it is not to be triffled with even for an instant.

Matter and energy are shifted as needed NOT TO CONSERVE CHARGE, but to maintain a CONSTANT EXTANT UNIVERSAL NET CHARGE. Arguments are wide open on whether the universe is net zero charge, net positive charge or net negative charge. This, to my thinking, is truly unknowable. It is immaterial, too......Who cares? What difference would it make? ZIPPO.

It is little discussions and discoveries like this that lock charge into the source of all reality for me and help relegate mass and energy into the also rans and bean counter fodder of the universe. This includes particle balancing and such. It is all bean counting of mass and energy due strictly to the urgings of the universe to maintain a FIXED, STABLE, NET CHARGE, based on UNIT CHARGE exchanges.

Gravity is another whole kettle of very smelly fish that begs to be fried, but it, too, looks primal and is definitly potential in nature just as is charge. The universe as I have said, is a place governed solely by two primal, MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE POTENTIAL ENERGY forces in constant exchange. The kinematics of the universe, including magnetism and photons are interim, secondary stuff and do not relate to key universal issues at all. They are but CONNECTORS and WHEELWORK produced solely by the potential, primal, interactions. They are a linkage, if you will, or self assembling bridge between the primals and matter.

Richard Hull
Progress may have been a good thing once, but it just went on too long. - Yogi Berra
Fusion is the energy of the future....and it always will be
Retired now...Doing only what I want and not what I should...every day is a saturday.

guest

Re: The theoretical musings continue.

Post by guest » Thu Dec 11, 2003 12:01 am

Hi Richard,

Richard Hull wrote:
> Of course there is no actual real measurment of photon exchange in the sense that you posit. It is all theoretical.

This is not true. You did not read the page, or perhaps you didn't understand it? Steven Lamoreaux empirically measured the Casimir effect. It is not just a theoretical phenomenon.

> We have no idea of the ORIGIN of nascent primary charge. This is electrostatic charge. Strong charge is a mathematical construct and has no testability outside of superb mathematical machinations based on an assumption of an Aether and virtual photon exchange. Zero virtual photons exchange exists in my mind due to no one have ever observed virtual photons. Yet these same items are talked about theoretically as if they are accepted science.
>

Strong charge does have an empirical basis. Whenever you feel the effect of magnetism between two permanent magnets, you are directly experiencing the effect of the strong charge. Whenever you take notice that the atoms in your body remain consistently held together, you are acknowledging the effects of the strong charge. When Steven Lamoreaux measured the Casimir effect, he was measuring the force exerted on the strong charge.

The term "virtual photons" is not a part of my theory. You are bringing in someone else's view of what transpires between the two strong charges. In my view, the photons are real because the measured effect predicted by the presence of these photons is real.

>Charge is the primal item that generates all photons, all
>magnetic forces and creates directly or indirectly 100% of all
>localized material motions and dynamic energies. It is the
>basis for all nuclear, atomic and molecular structure.

>Charge, while we don't know what it is can be looked at a
>primal. Gravity is obviously primal or certainly appears to be as
>it is certainly the demanded complimentary form of potential
>energy in the universe needed to keep things spun up along
>with charge.

It is interesting that you are saying that gravity and charge are primal. Elementary charge is the thing that the electrostatic force acts upon, mass is the thing that the gravitational force acts upon. Are you saying the force (gravity) is primal or are you saying the thing force acts on (charge) is primal?

It would seem that either charge and mass are primal, or electrostatic force and gravitational force are primal, but not a mixing of the two groups.

Also, how do you quantify that the elementary charge produces magnetism?

Dave

User avatar
Richard Hull
Moderator
Posts: 12513
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 1:44 pm
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: The theoretical musings continue.

Post by Richard Hull » Thu Dec 11, 2003 12:37 am

Charge is extant - PERIOD and fact. Electrostatic force is a result of charge interaction and has no existence whatsoever without extant charge. Charge is primal. All charge that we see is associated with matter. Electrostatic force is just the reaction manifested in charged matter.

Force implies motion through a measured distance. It is the classic definition of force. Charge has no force but that another charge exists. When two charges are extant, electrostatic force is then ALLOWED TO EXIST.....and only then. No chicken or the egg here.

Gravity, as is manifested with the graitational force between matter, is primal as it is absolutely necessary along with the mutually exclusive charge and its electrostatic interaction with charged matter to keep the universe in motion and pertetually kinematic.

No magnetic field can ever exist without charge in motion either in locked up matter due to magnetic moments arising from the of spinning charged matter particles (permenant magnets) or in free space. All magnetism is secondary and a reaction flowing solely and directly from charge in motion. NO magnetic field in motion can create electrical charge, only move extant charge about. Magnetism can't DO anything primal and is not a primally extant force except in so far as there is charge somewhere in motion.

We can make a magnetic field anywhere and at any time where there is none. We can take matter and turn it into a macroscopic permanent magnet (domain) where there was none. A key to the secondary nature of magnetism is that like its progenitor charge it has a polar nature. Magnetism is an end of the line force. Magnetic force, working on its own, can't MAKE anything else as charge can. Charge can make photons and magnetism, new forms of energy, both potential and kinetic. Magnetism is also a potential energy, like its progenitor, charge and totally fixed and static except in that a charge changes its motion.

We cannot create charge anytime or anywhere.

We cannot create gravity.

By the same token we cannot create matter. We and nature CAN create MASS DEFECT. Done all the time in fusion

Gravity is a potential energy. Gravitational force is a resultant of this potential energy acting between to material bodies. There is not such thing as gravitational force without the extant potential energy, gravity itself. The source of gravity is equally unknown as is that of charge. We see both as a property of matter. I have noted that it might be the other way around that matter is a property of the existance of of the these two potential energies at singularly fortuitous points in space.

It is patently ridiculous to speak of gravitational force or electrostatic force without the pre-existing and nascent potential energy entities of charge and gravity. Forces are not primal but the result of potential energy interactions which we observe through material or matter interactions. Matter and its kinematics being the greasy, commonplace expressions of those potential energies we observe. Gravitational force and electrostatic force have no meaning without the pre-exant potential energies to make them known and measurable.

These two mutually exclusive potential energy sources solely control the universe, not dynamic ones. All dynamic forces and EM radiations and photons are solely the result of potential energy interactions through matter.

As regards the hypothesized strong charge and the measured casimir force..... The strong charge might be absolutely demanded in a THEORY set forth to explain what the Casimir force is, but it is not measurable directly in a laboratory as a separate entity. It is an assumed entity needed to make up a theory around a measured PHYSICAL FORCE.

NO ELECTRICAL FORCE MEASUREMENTS WERE DIRECTLY MADE HERE!

The strong charge was precisely and mathematically derived to explain a physical result, NOT an electrical one.

Richard Hull
Progress may have been a good thing once, but it just went on too long. - Yogi Berra
Fusion is the energy of the future....and it always will be
Retired now...Doing only what I want and not what I should...every day is a saturday.

User avatar
Frank Sanns
Site Admin
Posts: 1726
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2002 6:26 pm
Real name: Frank Sanns
Location: Pittsburgh, PA USA

AHHHHHHH Re: The theoretical musings continue.

Post by Frank Sanns » Thu Dec 11, 2003 3:23 am

I think you guys are playing it fast and loose here. What is called antimatter is not antigravitational matter, it is anti color charge matter. Color charge is just one more attribute that matter can have besides Coulombic charge. Antimatter, like matter still has positive gravitational attraction.

Which brings up the next point. There CAN be a gravitational field without an electromagnetic field but an electromagnetic field can not exist without a gravitational field. Then we have the equivalence of a bulk property of matter with a fundamental property (gravitational vs. inertial masses). A coincidence that should not be based on empirical science.

Then take the case of a +1, +2, and +3 ion in a row with one moving at constant velocity and the other 2 oscillating at different speeds relative to each other. Which one will emit a photon? Which one(s) are producing a magnetic field. Things are not as simplistic as it appears. The universe is intertwined in ways that we need to use our minds to figure it out.

As for the empirical form of science being the only true science is just not true. Many of the greatest scientific discoveries were conceived of in the mind first. Only afterwards were experiments designed to test the theories. Relativity, fundamental charge, photoelectric effect, and on and on and on.

A mind is a terrible thing to waste.

Frank S.

User avatar
Richard Hull
Moderator
Posts: 12513
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 1:44 pm
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: AHHHHHHH Re: The theoretical musings continue.

Post by Richard Hull » Thu Dec 11, 2003 5:25 am

I have always held that charge, magnetism and electromagnetic fields are all totally separate, totally unrelated to and not interdependant on anything gravitational. Gravityis a separate and unrelated phenomena to anything electromagnetic. There is no scientific link between the two or a grand unification would have been a snap.

Antimatter has always been shown to have normal gravitational characteristics and be absolutely identical to normal matter with normal positive energy relating totally to our universe particles save for charge sign. I have never said otherwise. The antimatter particles positron and antiproton are listed as STABLE! And they would be around forever if it were not for their being born into such an overwhelmingly wrong charged area that we occupy. So they get killed off real quickly taking one of our own with them.

A mind is a terrible thing to waste, indeed. There is certainly no loss of fertile and overactive imaginations in modern physics.

There are equal numbers of stumble-ons in science where engineers and chemists were working in producing wheelwork and improving day to day life for which the physicist had no theory or even clues as to how to proceed to explain things that a kid could currently demonstrate and observe. Examples, chemical theory, early electrical phenomena, X-rays, radiation, etc.

Richard Hull
Progress may have been a good thing once, but it just went on too long. - Yogi Berra
Fusion is the energy of the future....and it always will be
Retired now...Doing only what I want and not what I should...every day is a saturday.

Post Reply