# Brainstorming on Electrinos and Positrinos

NEOCLASSICAL PHYSICS AND QUANTUM GRAVITY
Imagine that nature is emergent from pairs of Planck scale fundamental particles, the electrino and the positrino, which are equal yet oppositely charged. These are the only carriers of energy, in electromagnetic and kinetic form. Now add in an infinite 3D Euclidean space (non curvy) and Maxwell’s equations. 𝗡𝗣𝗤𝗚 explores this recipe for nature and how it emerges as a narrative that is compatible with GR and QM, yet far superior in ability to explain the universe and resolve open problems. For 𝗡𝗣𝗤𝗚 basics see: Idealized Neoclassical Model and the NPQG Glossary.

This is a post of brainstormed ideas. Which of these ideas can stand the test of nature? I’ll be pondering these ideas to see which move forward into the Neoclassical Physics and Quantum Gravity model.

My intuition says this is moving in the right direction, but there is still some cognitive dissonance that may indicate that some of the ideas are convoluted or not completely settled. Please contribute in the comments if you find any inconsistencies or breakthroughs.

• An electrino/positrino pair is a stable charged magnetic dipole.
• It must be possible to split an electrino/positrino pair, since many particles aren’t symmetric.
• Is a photon a stable configuration of six electrino/positrino pairs in the superfluid gas?
• Is superfluid gas dominated by low energy photon and/or low energy neutrinos or is there another particle such as a graviton or axion that comprises spacetime gas? Does low energy correspond to relatively low velocity of the particles comprising spacetime gas?
• Photon and neutrino particles have neutral charge indicating that the composite formula uses equal numbers of electrinos vs. positrinos.
• Do photon and neutrino particles act as shells for standard matter?
• Each of the shell/payload particle formulas has a stability (half-life, decay rate) that depends on an energy range.
• Do the relatively stable energy ranges for photons and the generations of neutrino particle overlap?
• Reaction outcome (or stability) is due to both the particle configuration and energy, but also the environment, i.e., spacetime gas temperature and pressure, nearby particles and their geometry, etc.
• There are an enormous number of different local configurations of electrinos and positrinos when you consider all the composite particles of the standard model, collider products in PDG, periodic table, molecular structure, and so on.
• We may need to reorganize the standard model chart.
• The open cells on the electrino vs. positrino formula chart may indicate the possibility of new particles!
• Are fermion generations partially shedding their shell as energy gets higher?
• Why are quarks unstable in a neutrino shell?
• A neutron is a photon with a 3/3 anti-neutrino payload. Symmetric.
• A proton is a photon with a 0/6 positron payload. Symmetric.
• Up quark is 1/5. Not symmetric. Not stable. Is the instability related to the asymmetry? Do quarks not have a shell because it we observe them after being blown up in a collider?
• Down quark is 4/2. Not symmetric. Not stable. Is the instability related to the asymmetry, or perhaps lack of a shell.
• One source of celestial object spin is due to behaviour of dense hot particles in the core (ultimately a Planck core of charged magnetic dipoles).
• As more energy is transferred to dense hot charged magnetic dipoles, they likewise assume configurations that can store more energy.
• Energy is stored in both kinetic forms and in electromagnetic forms.
• These configurations take enormous surrounding energy to contain.
• Does the angular momentum of particles joining a Planck core transfer to outer layers, causing spin?
• Does a Planck particle core tend to have alternating manifolds of opposing charged magnetic dipoles? Does a Planck core behave like an electromagnetic battery?
• This may help explain how some lattice faults are annealed out of the precursor to a Planck core.
• Still, I presume there remain some faults or shifts in the structure as well as alignment faults when mapping the lattice structure to the spherical nature of the core.
• What is the temperature of a particle?
• The temperature is its total energy, i.e., the Hamiltonian.
• Do all epsilons in a particle have the same scalar velocity?
• Do the photon and neutrino shells store a different amount of energy than the payload?
• Einstein said $\mathbf{E=m c^2}$. How do we introduce v, the speed of the electrinos and positrinos ε⊖ & ε⊕, orbiting IN the particle shell? Relativistic mass includes a Lorentz gamma multiplier. What is the relationship of the particle energy magnitudes in electromagnetic form and in the kinetic forms, i.e., linear velocity, rotational velocity of the electrino and positrino within the particle shell and payload?
• Local c depends on permittivity and permeability, which vary with energy stored. The more energy stored, the denser the matter and superfluid gas, and the higher the permittivity and permeability.
• A Planck photon could give off a fraction of the Planck energy and still have a speed that would be measured as c according to the sensitivity of modern instruments.
• The Lorentz factor is fundamental here.
• We say that energy may only be carried by electrinos and positrinos.
• Turn it around – only electrinos and positrinos carry energy and we realize that they are the dynamos, the rechargeable batteries of our universe.
• The shorter the wavelength, i.e., the faster the frequency, the wave equation path length must get shorter.
• It does in two ways, by reducing shell size, and by varying the wave equation in harmonics of each shell.
• Is wavelength the same as the wave equation pathlength? If not, how are they related?
• The penultimate energy particle, just below the energy of the Planck particle, may have the sum energy of harmonics 2..N, where N is the lowest permissible harmonic, i.e., 0x0111…111. It seems like this might be a complicated wave equation. Adding one more Nth harmonic produces the Planck particle with only the first harmonic, 0x1000…000. This is also the ultimate phase change where general relativity breaks down, so perhaps the 6/6 photon and the electrinos and positrinos localize to 1/1?
• It is as if the shell radius and speed of the electrinos and positrinos represents both the kinetic and electromagnetic energy stored in the particle shell. At high energy the shell shrinks. As energy is dissipated the shell expands.
• I think I need to go spend some quality time studying harmonics and fourier series.
• In the standard model particle composition table I have shown some ideas on photon and neutrino shells and their payloads and how they might map to the standard model. It is fascinating to me that the 1/1 electrino/positrino pair would correspond to the tau neutrino. And 2/2 and 3/3 are also neutrinos. It seems that Planck plasma may emit Planck neutrinos (perhaps a mix of electron neutrinos, muon neutrinos, and tau neutrino) and Planck photons.

PREDICTIONS AND HYPOTHESIS

• Particle inertial mass is directly related to the energy required for a wave equation solution given the particle’s electrino/positrino formula.
• The wave equation solution exchanges gravitational energy waves with neighbors, particularly in superfluid.
• Generation II and III fermions have less shell material.
• Photons and electron neutrino particles are the most stable. This is why they make good shells for payloads.
• The speed of light, c, decreases as a function of superfluid energy, i.e., temperature. As more energy is stored, the permittivity and permeability rise.
• Local c is the square root of the inverse of permeabilty times permittivity of the superfluid gas.
• Variable speed of light is the cause of refraction around dense matter-energy objects, also known as “gravitational lensing.”

J Mark Morris : San Diego : California : June 18, 2019 : v1