If you like you can start with a “Build Your Own Nucleus” construction kit. You can download it here:
And yes I mean it: A gluon is simply a “shared” vertice between two Rotons (quarks). Rotons bound together to create a stable geometric figure. In the end the rotating sub-particles will not keep their place in a single Roton, they will change places and travel along the gluon lines. This creates the connection and gluon-forces between the quarks.
A quark is a quark, but it can have different rotation orientations (pointing outside or inside the nucleus) and it can have different “factors” of how often a vertice is used by a traveling sub-particle in avarage. Furthermore it might have a different of “Intersection-Points” where Quarkons can switch tracks.
If you think of Nuclei as of stable dodecahedrons or icosahedrons, then they will normaly be rotating around their “electrically” neutral axis (given by the contained electron). So they will basically still rotate (at least in the isolated observed H and He atoms).
So think what happens if you observe a Proton from one side and place 3 differently colored lights around it. Then the different scattering angles will show different colors which will constantly change.
Furthermore: if you think of Quark-Sub-Rotons to change their paths along the vertices (gluons), then depending on where their paths go, the rotation circles might even be used in different rotation directions which will change an Quark into its anti-quark.
Result: You will see this constant changing of Quark colors and polarity as modelled in the QCD by quarks.
TODO: Need a consistant name for these rotating particles (Quark-Resonon, electron?, Quarkon). TODO: Need a consistant name for a Roton-Style Quark: Quark grid-Loop.
OPEN TASK: Find a consistant mapping between the QCD and the different rotation participations of the Quarkons.
HAVE FUN AND: WE ARE STILL WORKING ON THIS TO MAKE IT REALLY CONSISTENT WITH EXISTING EXPERIMENTS
A Photon is a simple circle in space. Apart from a circle a oszilating self sustained rotation can also build other types of loops.
OUT OF DATE COMMENT: The entities that build up a quark might most likely not be direct photons as mostly discussed below, they might be a Nuetrino (a single loop of the 3-loop electron) or in other words a Roton built of two Photons. Calculations show, that it might need an additional Roton-Layer to build up as much energy needed to bind together a nucleus.
Let’s start with a simple first level of adapted Loop: the Figure-eight immersion curve
We see two separate sub-loops with individual rotation directions, a positive (p) and negative (n). Is this loop stable according to the Roton-Model? Unfortunately not, there is no rotonal-force which keeps this object together. The sub-loops do not have a parallel alignment of their rotation axes, so the loop will eventually swap over and reform a circle.
Expectation: An isolated Quark is not stable and will decay into its rotating subparts (photon? something else?). So you would not even realize it was a quark. Remark: I’m well aware that quantum physics does not allow isolated quarks - in the sense that you can not pull them out of a proton.
This is the first construction of a stable isolated rotonal loop:
This shows a co-sense single center contribution:
This curve seems to be self sustaining. Reason: all rotational sub-axes are parallel and point in the same direction (sense of rotation), so the rotons keep their stable places within the 2D plane.
So you ask: where is the Quark gone? Where is the remaining charge, when all sub-rotons have a positive (p) rotation direction? You will later see when we construct helium cores, that this won’t actually matter.
The next variant shows a 1/3 counter-sense center: The trajectory passes every center path just once.
[TODO: not separately available]
The next variant shows a 3/3 counter-sense center So the trajectory passes every center path twice.
This Loop also has 4 Sub-loops. Let’s call these Sub-Loops Quartons because the come in 4 (quart). With some imagination, you can identify the similarity to the 3 Quarks of standard physics. You can keep calling the side-lopes Quarks if you like. 3 Quark parts overlap in the middle but with different additive aspects. Every single path through the inner loop passes 2 thirds of the circle. So the inner loop contains 2/3 * 3 quark-parts with a negative rotation. So the middle loop is “nn” double negative. And the full composite remains as 1 positive Quarton.
(In this visualization two double-loops would represent two (up) quarks fully sharing the middle circle and one (down) quark as single-loop. Why? Standard physics only describes what can be seen and measured from outside.)
The neutron might be a single overlap of 3 full eight-loops. Leaving 3 p and 3 n parts.
The next variant shows a 2/3 counter-sense center. So the trajectory passes every center path three times a full turn for every single loop.
What does a proton need to fulfill with the attraction model of the Roton-Model?
Requirements:
A Proton must have an inner structure and rotations which create enough overall symmetric radial energy density radiation to create an external mass of the given amount.The Electron to Proton interaction is of a different type, it’s a directional entangled connection. Which is inherently (mostly) distance independent. So we basically have to create “Objects” that have the ability to expose a left-over rotonal resonance as an electron. These objects shall be self-sustained and stable resonators (oh a new word again).
Please find attached a few conceptual sketches.
Conceptial preparation of ideas:
The concepts show: Once a resonant loop has been created in a knotted way, it can remain stable due to the induced resonances. So parallel or anti-parallel roton resonances can stabilize such trajectories. We need to find stable self-sustained objects, with the given properties.
Observable Quarks are said to come in these flaviours (there are more:
They comine like this:
Presumtion:
Now I read:
Prediction:
Now this rises interest in the Pions, which I ignored as purely “virtual” particles needed for energy calculations. But now they say: The leave curved wide traces in the detectors (wider than electrons). A pion has the same “charge” as an electron. According the Roton-Model it would then need to have a e- sized oszillation part. And a Pi typically decays into a Myon and a Myon Anti-Neutrino.
Conclusion: This sais for me, that a Pion has aspects of:
–> A Pion seems to be a Particle with these resonances: 1-Electron span, 2-Myon-span –> Light and heave seems to mean rotation speed and size?
So if a Meson leaves its context as a Pion, the pion does not have the matching size anymore for its energy/speed. It might want to adjust it’s radius appropriately, reaching the size of its more stable Myon version.
Prediction: Only one charged Pion can typicalle leave a Baryon (Proton). Check: Yes charge sum must of course match.
Prediction: If you want to get a Tau Neutrino, you have to throw something really heavy onto the Atom-Core so that it sais Uuups, help were are my electrons gone? Well they remain attracted to each other and create a Tau-Neutrino for a short time. And sometimes you are lucky, that even 4 electrons remain around the same center, this gives you a real heavy Tau-Lepton for a short time. These structures though, have the wrong electron-speeds to stay stable for too long. I expect them to decay even though the two electrons attract each other.
ATTENTION: THIS IS WORK IN PROGRESS !!!!!!
A Neutron seems to be a wrapped over shell …
Are we sure, a proton in an H-Atom is really a Proton? Or could it be an Electron
Please see separate section.
In general we will see, that a Proton and Neutron combination is only a kind of shell for a trapped electron (or positron).
An isolated Neutron is a “Positron” Trap. In case of a spontaneous Electron/Positron (Anti-Electron) creation, the Neutron will catch a positron and change into a Proton (a neutron containing a positron). Or if you like, “the absence of a electron”. Maybe the Proton only functions as a shell which absorbs rotonal LEDO waves from one side. From this point of view, all electrons on the other side will virtually “push” at the one electron into the direction of the protons cavity. Let’s call it positron anyway.
Electron is forced (adding energy) into a Proton: electron annihilates itself with the anti-electron. The Proton-Shell has nothing more to carry and becomes a Neutron (remaining what it is (or doing a flip-over?). In this state though the “Neutron-shell is not stable. The Neutron attracts an anti-electron, becomes a proton and the electron remaining from the fluctuating electron/positron creation flies away, together with some energy.
Good. So what does a Neutron (empty Shell) do in a atom-core? It unites with a proton and together they care about the positron in a double-shelled compound (RGB<->RGB on opposite sides of a Octahedron).
Prediction: If the envirment matches and the energy, and momentum match this should be possible:
Check the mass equation:
Compare masses (in MeV/c^2; numbers rounded): • Neutron: $m_n \approx 939.565$ • Proton: $m_p \approx 938.272$ • Electron: $m_e \approx 0.511$ • Deuteron (p+n bound): $m_D \approx m_p + m_n - 2.224 \approx 1875.613$ • Initial: $2n + 2e^-m_\text{initial} = 2m_n + 2m_e \approx 1880.153$ • Something like: “deuterium + 2 electrons” as final rest mass: $m_D + 2m_e \approx 1876.635$
Difference: $\Delta m \approx 3.52\ \text{MeV}$ So yes: in principle the system $2n + 2e^-$ has about 3.5 MeV more rest energy than “$D + 2e⁻$”, so there is room to produce a deuteron and still have ≈3 MeV left over as kinetic energy + neutrino energy + maybe a γ.
So this is energy-wise correct. • The allowed, but extremely rare, story would be: one n does β-decay, giving p + e + ν̄; p happens to fall into a bound state with the other n → D; the leptons and γ take the leftover energy. So: your picture “two n + two e → deuterium + stuff with some energy to leave” is conceptually consistent on the conservation/energy side — it’s just not a likely or efficient physical channel, compared to ordinary β-decay and ordinary p+n capture.
What is a neutrino: Standard physics: The lightest, simplest form of matter we know (comment: a 3D Object, not planar like a photon). Interactions: Only weak force and gravity. Passes through normal matter without noticing. The thing that makes a up-quark and down quark different. It is much lighter than an Electron.
According to the roton model: A Neutrino corresponds to a single rotonal loop the size of a Quarton. So what makes it different from a Photon?
Possibility (1):
Possibility (2):
The author very much likes the simplicity of this last approach. Instead of a real 3 loop electron, we might see a one-loop wobbling or in other words an ortiginal oscillation with a second much lower frequency.
Prediction: a neutrino will decay into two photons of different wavelength. But no, the neutrino will not simply loose its precession. So it has to interact with something. So it is a very stable object. Two neutrinos are expected though the be able to cancel themselves out (they are their own anti-particle). This would be the case if the have the same size, wavelengths and 180° phase-difference. Verification:
Second: If they hit a Quark in an Proton or Neutron, they might trigger a Neutron into a Proton or vise versa if they happen to have the matching phase. This phase matching would be very tiny though (confirmed: it is not known yet if a Neutrino is its own anti-particle, but annihilation cross-section is absurdly tiny though).
Prediction: A Neutrino can interact on the scale of: Quarks and therefore Neutrons+Protons and also electrons (when they are bound and have an extended size). Confirmed: YES.
BUT: I have no idea what an interaction could trigger within e.g. a proton. Possibility (A): a Neutron might change into a Proton and an electron. The electron can be detected. (Confirmed) Possibility (B): a Neutrino hits an electron and two other Neutrinos emerge (one Quarton got annihilated), two remain left and continue as 2 Photons or one other Neutrino (the remaining two rings recombine). -> Effectively: (i) Neutrino bumps at the electron looses some moment and the electron will emerge a photon (because it got disturbed on its way). -> Effectively: (ii) Intermediate W- Boson allows the neutrino to “turn into” an electron via the weak interaction. (rare) ve + e- –> e- + e+ + e- -> Effectively: (iii) Neutrino gets absorbed (reflected). Possibility (C): a Neutrino gives it’s energy to a nucleus, which might radiates it away as photons. (Confirmed)
This confirms other predictions, that photons interact spin-planar with matter (e.g. electrons) and might radiate or absorb light when changing direction.
So why do we see electrons in different states or sizes? First as rotating object around an atom (nearly point-like) and second as a compound object for protons and neutrons where they reach much higher energies?
Weak interaction: We now know, that the weak interaction is rotonal interaction on the span of Quarks and Electrons.
Why the differences in size? An electron will reduce it’s size during travel to reach the highest speed it can to carry away it’s energy. Proton structures can not they have twisted loops.
So what makes a Neutrino different to Light?
What about the Neutrino-Spin: During creation, they are either emitted radially, so they travel with their axis perpendicular to the travel direction. Or they are repelled out in roton-attraction direction. Then the Neutrino Roton-Axis will point into the travel direction. So we do not expect any arbitrary spin orientations. Or maybe there is some preference because it travels so fast. But leight does too
–> CHECK helicity
Or
TODO: I’m very eager to get into this topic in more detail and show a rotonal solution for the Structure of a Proton and Neutron.
Use the share button below if you liked it.
It makes me smile, when I see it.