December 23, 2020

I am brainstorming stream of consciousness ideas during NPQG Breakthrough Days. Some thoughts may be nonsense, others may be great ideas or spark another idea and before long you have an enormous conflagration and you understand how the universe works. Enjoy.

What is the topology of three rotating orthogonal dipoles?

Ink Drawings
Ink Drawings
Ink Drawings
Ink Drawings
Ink Drawings
Ink Drawings
Ink Drawings
Ink Drawings
Ink Drawings
Ink Drawings
Ink Drawings
Ink Drawings
Ink Drawings
Ink Drawings
Ink Drawings
Ink Drawings
Ink Drawings
Ink Drawings
Ink Drawings
Ink Drawings

Assume :

  • They are independent for this first thought experiment
    • In reality they exert electromagnetic forces on each other.
  • They rotate in the xy, xz, and yz planes with the same origin.
  • Let’s say they have the same speed.
  • We have two directions each can rotate in.
  • What are the symmetries?
  • How many configurations are there? One? More than one?

A helpful user on the PBS Space Time Discord server provided the following response which is incomprehensible to me other than I knew there would be a topological connection of NPQG to the group theory of the standard model.

In complex-coordinate math, this is known as SU(3) in the literature (the symmetry group for the color force; 3×3 complex matrix representation). Electroweak uses SU(2) [same idea, but 2×2 complex matrix representation]. The real analogs SO(3) and SO(2) of SU(3) and SU(2) are more for rigid rotations. [Jargon: SO := “special orthogonal group”, SU := “special unitary group”. It is formally meaningful to define SO for complex vector spaces, but these don’t behave nearly as much like SO over real vector spaces, as SU over complex vector spaces do.

User @zaimoni on PBS Space Time Discord.

Neoclassical Physics and Quantum Gravity unifies general relativity and quantum mechanics! NPQG is the complete specification for nature from which emergence produces our steady state universe with galaxy local bang/inflate/expand/crunch driven by the SMBH!

What is the physical basis for quantum mechanic’s ‘spin’?

J Mark Morris : San Diego : December 23, 2020

Unifying general relativity and quantum mechanics!

Now we’re getting down to it.

Fusing with the standard model.

Physics is fun!

J Mark Morris : San Diego : California : December 2020

How do nested shells implement containment of the shell(s) and/or payload they enclose?

  • Are they planar like a solar system?
    • Nature loves to regenerate patterns.
  • What do the fields look like for various geometries?
  • Are they orthogonal?
  • Are they independent?
  • Koide’s formula appears to describe the relationship of the fermion generations with containment shells implemented by nested dipoles with three energy ranges.
  • The mechanism appears to depend on the slower speed of the captured shell(s) and payload because electromagnetic fields travel slower thru dense electromagnetic fields. Who knew?
  • Is there some formula about the energy ratio required for containment? That would determine the ‘gear ratio’ or how many times a shell executes its wave equation for every single wave equation transit for the interior shell.
  • Maybe that is what Koide’s formula is telling us.
  • Perhaps with three shells each could have a radius in 1/3 bands of the outer radius.
  • So if the generation 3 fermion shell is at radius R, then the generation 2 shell would be at radius 2R/3 and the generation 3 shell would be at radius R/3 for a maximally stable particle.
  • This seems directionally promising.
  • Consider also that the more momentum a particle has, the smaller it’s shell radius.
  • As you perform work W to accelerate a particle, at least the outer shell is shrinking and its point particles are slowing.
  • Is energy transferred from an exterior shell to the next interior shell? If so, what is the mechanism?
  • The faster a shell is moving through spacetime aether, the slower its point particles are rotating.
  • Does momentum aid containment? i.e., does the inertia of the payload make it less likely to stray to challenge the containment field geometry? That feels like it makes sense.
  • Does a moving set of nested shells align so that the charges are rotating perpendicular to the line of travel? That would sort of make sense, especially as v approaches c.

Let’s ponder the gluon.

The gluon is a vector boson, which means, like the photon, it has a spin of 1. While massive spin-1 particles have three polarization states, massless gauge bosons like the gluon have only two polarization states because gauge invariance requires the polarization to be transverse to the direction that the gluon is traveling. In quantum field theory, unbroken gauge invariance requires that gauge bosons have zero mass. Experiments limit the gluon’s rest mass to less than a few meV/c2. The gluon has negative intrinsic parity.

  • The gluon has spin 1.
    • Is it a 6/6 particle like a photon?
    • Or 3/3(3/3), a neutrino that captured another neutrino (or all combinations with anti-neutrinos in the mix).
    • Is it a 3/3 particle that has a QM spin of 1 because of its formulation?
    • Is it possible that a 3/3 shell can have a configuration that is what we would call ‘anti-matter’ such that it can not coexist with other 3/3 shells that we call ‘matter’?
    • Perhaps these anti-matter 3/3 shells have a spin 1 and can only exist when protected inside a structure?
    • I’ve already concluded that what we call missing anti-matter is inside the neutron and proton.
  • Wikipedia : Gluons themselves carry the color charge of the strong interaction.
  • Discord user @zaimoni said the 3/3 dipole shell had a group theory representation that also occurs in color charge.
  • Did you notice that part where Wikipedia said ‘massive spin-1 particles have three polarization states’? Hmm, like a 3/3 dipole.
  • Ha ha, I’m feeling like MJ right now, floating from the baseline.
  • I can’t tell yet if we are dealing with redundant superimposed concepts that relate to a simpler underlying mechanism. It will all reveal itself in short order.
  • Is it possible that particle physicists are a bit confused? An 18/18 neutron or a 15/21 proton has the ingredients to make neutrinos, photons, gluons, quarks, etc. When a collider explodes these particles we appear to see all the possible particles that can result, but do scientists really understand the structure of what was blown up?

Do photon’s appear massless because they are a 3/3 shell containing a 3/3 neutrino? Is the 3/3 shell shielding the mass of the captured neutrino? Mass is ‘apparent energy’.

Apparent energy is a new concept. I would rather say ‘apparent energy’ than ‘mass’. That would dovetail well with potential energy. Apparent energy is also the outcome of energy or mass shielding which arises in high energy situations due to the electromagnetic shadow caused by the Lp radius sphere of immutability surrounding point charges that blocks fields. Specifically, I am referring to situations within some standard model particles and around and within Planck cores. There are no doubt more cases of energy shielding. By the way that shielded energy is not what scientists call ‘dark energy’. Dark energy is related to the energy of the Planck core jets that inflate and lead to galaxy local expansion.

I am imagining new graphic designs to illustrate the standard model. Bubbles. Bubbles within bubbles. Bubbles with a non-neutral payload. Triplets of bubbles. The proton and neutron appear to have many nested shells — a triplet within a triplet within a triplet. The proton and neutron with a 9/9(payload) structure might be better described as 3/3 (3/3 ( 3/3 (payload) ) ).

I like to think about improving terminology and symbols so that we can teach and learn nature and the universe with ease. I just had the idea that the Euro symbol € could be a good candidate symbol for a 3/3 shell. It sort of looks like a ‘C’ superimposed with an equals sign and that could evoke the important electromagnetic field velocity behaviour of the tau dipole that translates physics between the Euclidean and Riemannian frames. For example a proton could be written as €(€(€(6/12))). That describes a geometry in relatively few characters. We can improve the notation even further, e.g., €3(6/12).

Of course if we want to use these equations in programs, it would be helpful to have easy to type symbols or, perhaps better, an NPQG IDE (integrated development environment) that made it easy to use symbols or symbol constructs for the composite particles of the standard model, plus of course the electrino, positrino, and the tau dipole.

Imagine structure formation in an inflating Planck plasma with energy and point charges rapidly attempting to spread out in a chaotic maelstrom. It’s a game where high energy dipoles form and can capture other dipoles and solo point charges in their Faraday cage. Capture or be captured.

Capture or be captured. Often, it’s both.

J Mark Morris

It is amazing how much physicists know about the electrino, positrino, and especially the tau dipole without actually knowing their physical implementation, or even that they exist! I tip my hat, especially to the experimentalists and theorists who have painstakingly used science to observe and describe these characteristics.

J Mark Morris : San Diego : California : December 23, 2020

By J Mark Morris

I am imagining and reverse engineering a model of nature and sharing my journey via social media. Join me! I would love to have collaborators in this open effort. To support this research please donate:

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s