We are going to enter the atom core and look at the structure of the nucleus. Based on the Olavian Atom-Model we already know the needs for entangled connections. After refreshing them we will try to list a few considerations an properties and structure the nucleus should have.
Nuclei Nuclei (Proton, Deuteron, Alpha-Particle) are cages exposing resonance potentials on the span of electrons to the outside.
The RQM does not have any separate concept for “electric charge”. Charge is simply the sum of resonance potentials on the span of an electron which is emitted by an object. Therefore a proton has to provide resonance potentials at the scale of electrons. As an initial wording, a proton effectively contains and confines an electron.
Further realizations
An electron held in place can attract other electrons via anti-parallel entanglement.
Charge confinement One task to confirm the framework is to decide on the aspect of what property leads to free resonance potentials.
These are the candidates so far: (a) A proton/alpha confines an otherwise free electron. The electron is simply held in place via energy density distribution of the surrounding proton/alpha energy-density repulsion. (b) An electron having 3 rotation axes can expose one to the outside as entanglement point to the orbital electron and has 2 resonance directions free for internal coupling. (c) The whole Proton consists of grid-points which are electron-like entities. It only exposes electron resonance potentials if some internal bonding remains free.
Discussions: Let’s call the confined electrons (e-) in this chapter positrons (e+) nevertheless. Pro solution (b): would allow the exposing Roton to act as a phase-lock for resonance potentials of orbital electrons. The 2 other internal Rotons might limit the possibility for phase change. This would give a cleaner explanation for the rotonal attraction. The neutron seems not to be an empty cage, but rather to contain an electron-positron pair. Contra solution (b): internal entanglement would need accurate distances for distance locking. So the confined positrons would need to be in distance locking range to the Proton-Grid. But not provide the possibility for neither distance-locking nor entanglement with other nearby exposed positrons (in the nucleus).
Solution (b) seems favorable and in combination with (c) could explain the Beta-Decay sequences between Neutron and Proton.
This could also explain, why the entangled positrons do not create connections between different protons. Probably because first the resonance-distance for phase locking is not given. Or second, because they are both locked in place and phase. As such, an entanglement would lead to repulsion and would be avoided.
Nucleus structure A big task is to find an adequate representation of a geometric grid on which Rotons will align to build stable structures. And in addition use geometric relations, that correspond to physical observations of decay processes and scattering experiments. Furthermore an explanation for the witnessed e.g. scattering experiments leading to Quarks and QCD Theory needs to be found.
What is a Proton? It is half of a container that encapsulates an Anti-Electron. You are invited to follow the whole way of how this insight was established.
Deuterium-Atom Compound (H-Atom with additional Neutron):
An atom core consists of multiple distinct clusters of different sizes and constituents. The known stable clusters are these: Proton, Neutron, Deuteron, Triton, Alpha-Particle.
How can these be built from resonance grids proclaimed by the rotonal resonance framework?
There are different optimal placements with which we can build point-symmetrically and parallel Rotonal planes. These figures have to be strong enough, so they can hold the construct together in stable space. With only minimal need for extra rotations. But this might be the point. Lets give a short summary:
Remark: The placements for the Dodecahedron and Ikosahedron do not involve rotation “around” the whole 3D structure. With this we are starting to enter the space of “static” Objects where rotations remain planar and nevertheless cause resonant attractions accross the center.
I’m aware that concepts proposed in this article might sound like the 1920’s “mistake” when they said Neutron = Electron + Proton. And everybody had the idea, that electrons are a part of the nucleus too. So to avoid this we need so proper terminology first:
Electron: An elementary compact particle with a rotonal resonance in the span of an “electron” (e.g. electron, positron, anti-electron …). Orbital Electron: An electron in the orbit of an atom Core- or Alpha- Electron: “charge”-donating part of nucleons in the same span as orbital electron. Charge: Any object conveying LEDO-field resonances in the span (size, frequency) of an isolated or orbital electron. Quantum: one electron but spherically distributed, not statically entangled. Entanglement: Two Quarton: (aka Quark or 1/4) a resonance tube (rotonal ring or loop), sub-structure of Protons and Neutrons, with about 1/3 or 1/4 of their rotonal energy.
Why do we need this:
Types of entangled bonding:
We did not talk about the Neutron yet, and how this Neutron shall help to hold the nucleus together. First let’s forget everything we might known about charge, mass and quarks. Electrons and Protons do not attract or repel themselves as is. They only attract each other if they are entangled. In any other case they are simply repelled by their general energy density pressure. So a proton must simply provide a Rotonal-plane of the same characteristics as an electron.
We will soon see:
Requirements for Protons and Neutrons
Attraction and constellations: | Name | Alignment | Force | Properties | |—–|—–|—–| | | | | | | Co-Axial, Anti-Parallel In | x |-> <-| x | Strong attraction | Roton entangled, cancelled outside? | | Co-Axial, Anti-Parallel Out | x <-| |-> x | Strong attraction | Roton entangled | | Co-Axial, Parallel | |-> |-> | Stabilizing distance | Weakly keep at a constant distance, double intensity | | Co-Planar | $\underline{↑} \underline{↑}$ | Stabilizing, weak attraction | (??) |
This shows the meaning:
Visualization of Possible structure of a Electron:
Electron:
Visualization of Possible structure of a Proton-Neutron compound:
Visualization of a Proton-Neutron compound - Focusing on the confinement of the "charge" between 6 Quarks (e.g. Proton and Neutron).
What is the difference? When we symbolically draw the confined charge between the Electron and the Neutron, the questions remains, what exactly makes difference? In standard physics the “charge” is given to the Proton. and the Neutron is seen as “charge” + Proton. Or rather, the Proton of a H-Atom with no confinement.
Starting from a Deuterium (1 Electron + 1 Proton + 1 Neutron) we can finally see the final structure of how the nucleus works and how attraction between electrons and protons are given.
A Deuterium: 1 Electron + 1 Proton + 1 Neutron ... or rather: 2 Electrons + 2 Protons.
Outside “shape” of a Deuterium-Core
Proton Shape
A single Proton obviously exists in a stable form and conveys a directional entanglement charge of e+ into the LEDO-Field. Or if it rotates un-entangled, into the world in all 360° directions (matching to the 1/r^2 distance attraction behavior of the electromagnetic-field).
Is a e- the same as a turned around e+? Unfortunately this is not the case. Why? The spiral-wave of the Electron-Roton is symmetric and therefore mirrored at the rotation plane. This is purely geometrically, so you can not simply turn it around. Example: A Roton is rotating into Clockwise (R) direction into the x-direction. You will be baffled to see how this rotating system rotates when viewed into the -x direction (minus x). It is still (R). So lets have this arbitrary convention two rotation directions Electron e- (L) and Anti-Electron or Proton are e+ (R). Which is kind of “charge direction”.
The following sketch actually shows what we effectively thing what a Proton geometrically is:
A isolated proton provides a shell or field, which holds a very small degenerated electron/positron within the big Proton in place.
Proton ilustration:
Why is that needed:
Deuterium-Atom Compound (H-Atom with additional Neutron):
Octahedron Shape
So a Proton is a: R-(R)-R-R or a R-(L)-R-R or R-(2L)-R-R rotating system (quarks?). So a Neutron is a: L-(L)-L-L or a L-(R)-L-L or L-(2R)-L-L rotating system (quarks?) - PLUS an Anti-Electron
Can a Proton simply be turned around? Hmm …
Anti-Electron
Question of standard physics: Where have all the Anti-Electrons e+ (Positron) gone?
Answer: They are in the NP-Compounds of the Atom Nucleus, confined and protected from the outside
Side-mark: Can there also be an Electron in a NP-Compound? Yes. Would that be a Anti-Proton? Not necessarily?
Proton energy:
What would be different: Energy, mass, potential magnetic difference, this of course might change the spatial density situations.
YES exactly. BUT: ONly energy level (excitation levels of shell modes) not different particles. There are many (>25) but none are stable.
A spherical compound of a NP sharing a central charge source (electron) would be the optimal partner for the outer electron.
“He”:
The optimal compound to fulfill the Rotonal Nucleus structure would be a compound of NPNP in a spherical structure. Why? This would allow two electrons to rotate freely and align with the electrons in the outer sphere into a quad-entangled state. This would be possible with NO friction and resistance at all. So there is no need for a NP compound to rotate around a NP compound.
He-Core Shape:
And now look at this: it is called an Alpha-Particle in atom physics. A quiet important stable object when bigger atoms fall apart.
Be-Core Shape:
You can’t imagine how happy I am right now :-)
Standard physics:
up quark (u): +2/3 e / 2.2 MeV down quark (d): -1/3 e / 4.7 MeV (twice)
So as a sum we get: $6*(2/3e-1/3e) + 62.2 + 64.7 = 2e + 3*6$ = 18 faces plus 2 electrons (6 with 2.2 and 12 with 2.35 MeV)
Resonance Loop view:
4 nuclei with a 4 loop compound (4 circular planes) = 16 faces.
Let’s call such a 3-Lope nucleus resonant loop a Propeller (as a quark is somewhat misleading and differently composed).
The core loop of a Propeller can have -1, 1 or 2 faces (rotation direction and number of Sonon-Participation)
So we can compose structures with 16, but also 16+4 = 20 faces or 16-4=12 faces or other combinations.
What can we do with 16 faces? And maybe we can overlap some of them. And then think how to mix further Neutron Propellers in between.
Task: We need to align N circles in a point-symmetric way so they are as close together on a sphere as possible. The shall touch mot not intersect. They might have 2 different sizes.
Mathematical term: Tammes problem / spherical circle packing
Tammes problem = pack N congruent spherical caps on a sphere so that the minimum distance between centers is maximized. Equivalent formulation: place N points on the sphere so that the smallest pairwise distance is as large as possible; the circle radius follows from that distance. ATTENTION: these are not point-symmetric (needed for the Rotonal stability of the structure)
N=6 -> Octahedron N=8 -> Bigger Top and bottom circle (over a square) with six side-triangles. Parallel, but not symmetric. N=12 -> Icosahedron, fully symmetrical, 12 Triangles. -> Variation, 6 Big circles on Octahedron, 6 small circles on cube vertices (aligned to sphere) N=18 Not same sizes. 12 large circles (icosahedron vertices), 6 smaller on octahedron vertices. N=20 -> Regular-Dodecahedron vertices (not perfect but very close) -> 12 icosa + 8 cube N=32 -> Goldberg-icosahedral/geodesic sphere -> 12 icosa (large) + 20 dodeca (small). Gives 12 dominant axes, and 20 secondary directions. N=48 -> symmetric with rhombic and triangular sides
Additional need:
VISUALIZATIONS
Symmetrical packing of circles on a sphere
Attention: the circles are NOT painted in original size, as this would completely clutter the visualization. So you have to mentally increase them in size.
OUR BEST CHOICE
Standard Physics Version: N=18 with 12 larger and 6 smaller circles.
Rotonal Version: 12 main faces (the lopes) and 6 inner circles => 3 coordinate system
So we have basically a Icosahedron with 3 main axis
Variant: 12 main faces. 6 with multiple rotations?
Or lets have 4 shells and align their lopes as needed so there are 4 central circles expanding their 3 lopes and overlap = $4*3/2=6$ Lope parts. This gives 6 + 4 centers = 10, hmmm.
Our choice of the Alpha-Particle as a N=18 side (icosahedron vertices) structure of circles.
This construct has these properties:
Our choice of the Alpha-Particle as a N=18 side (icosahedron vertices) structure of circles.
The atom-core is basically a mirror of what happens with the electrons in the outer orbitals. The mirror is the “surface” of the nucleus. The core has to allow this mirroring to happen. Only this way the core manages to keep the electrons on their orbitals in a stable way.
If enforced Core-Rearrangements do not lead to a stable (mid-range) state, the atom will eventually break apart. It looses an electron an alpha-particle decays and the disaster starts to unfold. Leaving bored Neutrons behind moaning about their loss.
Confinement
What holds the confined electrons within an Alpha-Particle?
- Pure Energy-Density stabilization. The Quark-Lopes create a inward Energy-Density gradient keeping the electrons in the center.
- The electrons themselves drift apart from each other caused by the energy-density pressure.
- The electrons attract each other via the electron span rotonal force (entanglement).
Loss of electrons
Can an alpha particle be stable without the distant electron entanglement with the Atom-Orbital electrons?
- It is stable because of the orbital electrons. Will it decay if on electron gets lost?
- It depends. The entanglement with the atom-orbital electrons allows an even stronger attraction/coupling between the two Alpha-Electrons.
- The loss of an orbital electron might most likely favor a separation of an Alpha-Particle into two He-Cores. Each Alpha-electron in it’s own P-N confinement.
How can Octahedrons be packed optimally?
Hypothesis: At some numbers there will be abetter stacking possibility. We might find a correlation.
Which are good solutions:
Summary: • N = 1 – trivial: one octahedron inscribed in the sphere. • N = 2 – back-to-back along a diameter (two touching octahedra). • N = 4 – a tetrahedral cluster of octahedra, oriented symmetrically. • N = 6 – something like an octahedral arrangement (one can imagine placing them roughly at ±x, ±y, ±z). • N = 8 – cube-like arrangement (centers near cube vertices). • N = 12 – centers roughly on the vertices of an icosahedron, if the octahedra are not too large. • N = 24 – inspired by the 24-cell / kissing arrangements in higher dimensions and by “shell + inner layer” ideas. • N = 32 – sometimes appears in spherical point packings as a nice symmetry number.
So does this also come together with the Periodic-System behavior?
N=2 – x4 -> N=8 O N=4 – x4 -> N=16 S N=6 – x4 -> N=24 Cr (Chrom) This is known to be a well cut in size. N=8 – x4 -> N=32 Ge N=12 – x4 -> N=48 Cd N=24 – x4 -> N=96 Cm
Top view of Proton-Neutron Compound, needs to be wrap around so outer circle corresponds to small circle at bottom. Idea is: see how the possible rotation directions might allow Sonons to change paths.
Proton at Top, Neutron at bottom. Or is all together the Proton?
Consider: Typically for each Electron we have an additional Neutron, so there is a 1 to 1 relationship. What do the Alpha-Particle clusters need further Neutrons for? Which they do according to the periodic system masses/energy.
Consider: When we scatter electron off a proton. we should actually sometimes see, that it eventually hits out the electron. So either: the inner electron scatters, the old one remains in the proton. Two electrons fly away, one Neutron remains.
Gluons: Those are the carrier of rotonal waves on level of a Sonon and Quark
Use the share button below if you liked it.
It makes me smile, when I see it.