First element with attribute size

Protons and Neutrons are the smallest and first entities, which can truly be assigned the property of “size”. At least spatial size as we perceive it in context of matter. Why does matter show exentions in 3 dimensions? Probably simply because electrons happen to combine 3 rotational components.

Prerequisites

Before reading this chapter, you should first familiarize yourself with these concepts:

• A proton is a small container for an electron. A proton/neutron compound (2 nuclei) is a combined bigger container for 1 electron. A Tritium-Core (3 nuclei) and an Alpha-Core (4 nuclei) are containers for 2 electrons.
• The combination of 2 electrons in an Alpha-Core is needed to provide an optimal quad-entanglement (e<->p-p<->e) rotation pair.
• An electron consists of 3 photons with different rotation axes, but the same center. So it can build up to 3 entanglements.

Base Requirements

To create a stable resonance grid we consider this:

• The resonances have to be aligned on a symmetric grid such that they can build Rotons across the center of the Proton and Neutron (called Baryons).
• Protons and Neutrons should provide a shell-halve as similar as possible. If we “assign” the contained electron to one of the shells (called Baryons).

The difference between a Proton and a Neutron

Why do we need to talk about the difference between a Proton and a Neutron? And yes we can not do this without having had a deep look at what “quarks” are and what not.

As we know, Protons and Neutrons are only cages to hold an electron (e+ if you like).

There is no positive charge

As mentioned earlier on, there is no positive charge in a Proton. It is simply a negative charge held at a specific place.

A question long unanswered was: How does the trapped electron look like a positive charge to external electrons? a) Because the Proton holds the electron (e+) at a specific place (which might be sufficient in terms of magnetism). b) Or also because it holds the electron in a specific orientation? Like its (current main) rotational axis aligned with its structural orientation?

Long keeping with the interpretation (a), it now looks like (b) is matching better to the experimental results.

Even in a NP-Deuterium core experiments show, that the P and N end of a proton can be distinguished. But maybe only, because one is the north and the other to the south-pole in respect the proton/neutron orientation. Another questions was, whether the proton/neutron resonance-grid is kind of open at the top and bottom (no rotating electron ring). Or if they are closed and the electron is free to rotate in any way. The important part is, that the resonance shell must be transparent for sending the directed e+ resonance potential.

Quarks

A revelation comes when we completely start to move the concept of quarks away and simply try to answer, what cage would be most suitable? And then interpret the experimental results from a new perspective.

Experiments basically show:

• When scattering electron onto protons: (a) some electrons scatter as if they hit a 2/3 charge. (b) some electrons scatter as if they hit a 1/3 charge.
• QCD colors refer to the quarks strong interaction charge. A charge that couples quarks to gluons (the strong force). Rotonal: This force couples opposite quarks together. And in every P and N all 3 colors R,G,B are present.
• The term “Isospin” seems to be the quantum state of this difference and the Isospin can even change its orientation. So N can swap roles with P. BUT: very important they say, this has nothing to to with geometrical orientation. Not? Strange.

But hey, this is a nice match for the Olavian model.

Grid structure

This most suitable cage is a resonance grid of 2-4 bands of 5 circles with resonating electrons. Why? Why where quarks invented? Because some measurements showed, that some parts of an nucleus feel like a 2/3 charge and some like a 1/3 charge. We do not actually know what part and how much of the nucleus.

Now how many rotating photons did we say build up an electron? We said 3, one fore each spatial direction. (btw. what was the trigger for 3 in the first place? Do we maybe experience 3 dimensions BECAUSE the electron chose to have 3?) So cause or effect, we’ll newer know.

Electron alignment

The 3 rotatory planes of the electron allow for 3 differently oriented entanglement. This property is exactly used for building up stable grids on spheres to withhold internal and external pressures.

Axis 1: Alongside the circular (Q) paths to the next electron in front and/or back (there are always some present as we’ll see). This is parallel alignment resulting in distance lock-in. Axis 2: Orthogonal to travel direction across a grid-circle. Parallel alignment. Axis 3: Across the nucleus center through the encapsulated electron to en electron at opposite position.

Neutron

If we hypothetically remove the electron from the proton, what would make the neutron different? The author has the gut feeling: Nothing. When we have an isolated Neutron we can look what it has as interaction to the outside: +2/3, -1/3, -1/3. With the Proton everything looks inverted (-1/3, +2/3, +2/3). And in combination as an NP compound we have a charge of 0. Now we take an electron an insert a e+. How will this change the appearance? At the top the e+ will behave to the nearby electrons

The R, G, B, and Anti R, G, B show the 3 spatial directions where currently the grid resonance create rotonal attraction. 3 directions across the center axis and 2 from top to bottom cap.