## Gluon Color Charge Assembly

Let’s brainstorm about the art of the possible with point charges where we suspend disbelief and imagine how to make it work and match existing theories. A good topic is how a proton might work with gluons and color charge. This brainstorm session was conducted on the Discord server of PBS Space Time and the dialogue generated many wonderful ideas.

The chart shows the point charge ingredients that assemble into a proton, which are two up quarks and one down quark. Quarks are fermions with a 2-2-2-6 structure. The 2-2-2 is shown as the dipoles on the dark grey orbitals. Orbitals are more generally “paths” of point charges, but you can also think of them as wave equation generators. The inner circular orbits are logarithmically higher energy and smaller scales. The 2-2-2 is also a tri-dipole structure, which is termed the Noether core, after Emmy Noether, because the tri-dipole is an amazing transaction accumulator, and accountant. The outer six personality charges in each quark are at lower energy and I would guess they fly around the polar regions of each of the three dipoles. Those six locations would sort of be a point charge structure duals of Lagrange points in gravitation.

That’s the background. It might take a bit of time to absorb that. Let’s take that basically on faith for the brainstorm session. So, then the discussion could be how would these three quark structures take on a grander structural pattern of orbits in the proton. We know that scientists model nucleons with gluons and color charge. Could the gluons be the Noether core dipoles themselves? Might the gluons go into some kind of a dance where they are exchanged between Noether cores? Scientists talk about flux tubes. What might implement that with these ingredients? Ok, I’m going to go take a quick look at color charge and see if I can get some ideas on how it might be implemented.

Color charge is a property of quarks and gluons that is related to the particles’ strong interactions in the theory of quantum chromodynamics (QCD). The term color and the labels red, green, and blue are for distinction only, and imply no implementation.

Some structures have corresponding anti-structures. A structure with red, green, or blue charge has a corresponding anti-structure in which the color charge must be the anticolor of red, green, and blue, i.e., antired, antigreen, and antiblue, for the color charge to be conserved in structure:anti-structure creation and annihilation. All three colors mixed together, or any color and its complement has a net color charge of zero.

The strong interaction requires color confinement, free structures must net zero color charge
a baryon is composed of three quarks, which must be one each of red, green, and blue.
an antibaryon is made of three antiquarks, one each of antired, antigreen, and antiblue.
– A meson is made from one quark of any color and one antiquark with matching anticolor.

Wikipedia – edited for clarity, including ‘particle’ changed to ‘structure’

Aside : I think the ‘color charge’ metaphor should be replaced in the point charge era. We need a term that is descriptive of the actual implementation. Paradigm shifts are good opportunities to reset the terminology.

Ok, so what clues do we have about the implementation. The pro and anti might map to the pro and anti of the Noether cores which is basically the spin orientation of the three angular momentum vectors.

One thing I have found is that there are so many mini AdS-CFT like correspondences. That is why the symmetries of nature are driving everyone mad. Because you can find elements of the truth in a zillion transformations that each themselves have some duality to the truth.
When I say that modern physics and cosmology are a patchwork quilt of effective theories I am really trying to express this idea that all the successful theories have some scale x dimension patch that is effective in its domain and also has a transformation to the natural truth.

Are strong force and weak force related? Yes, but it’s complicated. I think the personality layer is also the weak charge layer and I think these six weak charges in each fermion execute a path that is somehow related to the six polar regions of the three dipoles in the core.
So that is going to be a complex dynamical relationship and at this point I have no clue how the behaviours would map. What are the patterns that link weak and strong forces?

Well, for one, the symmetries of one is a subgroup of the symmetries of the other. Weak symmetries represented by SU(2) AND Strong symmetries represented by SU(3)

Interlocutor

Well, ok. We have a bingo there. I have already linked my tri-dipole to SU(3). And yes, I was thinking SU(2) would be the weaker personality layer. So why the subgroup? Ok, I’ll give you my primitive half-baked theory. I think that the tri-dipole’s are incredibly good at trading energy between each other to reach a harmony in frequencies. Maybe f, f*sqrt(f), f^2 or something sensible – its on my list to noodle. In any case, now you have these harmonic tri-dipoles emitting these complex local electric potential Dirac spheres. And in my view point charge velocity can exceed the electric potential field speed. Ok at that point, there is a lot going on in a local charged N-body problem with electric potential speed @. That is where I am currently focused trying to understand the specific geometry so I can do the simulation.

Aside : It’s easiest to think in terms of units of Planck time, but with everything moving about continuously. Field speed is one Planck length per Planck time. If you think in these units, point charges move in slow motion and it’s a lot easier to figure out what is going on. Pedagogically, developing the ability to zoom in and out over some 60 orders of magnitude in distance and time is extremely helpful when it comes to understanding nature.

If I consider each dipole separately and the two personality charges associated with each polar region of the axis of rotation then that is a set of four point charges. Color might then describe the pattern of which energy level dipole gets which personality duo.

Each dipole implements a magnetic field with north and south poles. If dipoles are gluons, then they would surely like to couple poles together. But we have the lower energy personality charges flying some path around those poles as well. Since an up quark is modeled with 5 positive personality charges and one negative personality charge then color could be determined by which of the three dipoles gets the plus and minus combo. A similar chart could be made for down quarks.

I suppose the scalar and vector potentials are swirling quite a bit local to a dipole axis. I would imagine the situation to be dualistic with a relativistic jets. The peak magnitude of these potentials is falling off at least at 1/r^2, although I’ve seen examples with dipoles that yield 1/r^n with I think n = 3 and 5. That was in a Prof. Carlson (https://www.youtube.com/c/ProfCarlson) episode. Perhaps more important is the frequency at which the two polar axial potential vortices are churning. Does any of this map to what we see in QED, QCD, or QFT?

If the polar conjecture is on the right track, then instead of thinking of the personality as being a layer of six low energy charges at some much larger radius band, perhaps it would be better to think of a personality duo associated with each dipole. So each super high energy dipole could support two lower energy charges swirling one per polar potential vortex. That is a fascinating way to think about the geometry and it makes intuitive sense to me. This is a fun aspect of dynamical point charge geometry — you can do thought experiments to imagine structure behaviour in this period before the detailed geometry and simulations are ready.

Nature loves to reveal dualistic behaviours at various scales.

Let’s imagine the assembly theory progression.

1. Dipole (parity symmetry)
2. Dipole capture of lower energy personality duo in polar vortices.
1. electrino : electrino (-e/3)
2. electrino : positrino (0) spin dependent
3. positrino : electrino (0) spin dependent
4. positrino : positrino (+e/3)
3. Dipole Nesting — Noether cores
1. 1, 2, and 3 level nests correspond to fermion generation III, II, I.
2. The spin orientation of the angular momentum vectors determines pro and anti Noether cores.
4. Noether core assemblies
1. Photon : a pair of contra-rotating coaxial tri-dipoles.
2. Neutrino : wobbly low energy photon with oscillating shielding.
3. Electron : a Noether core with six electrino personality.
4. Proton, Neutron : three quark structures, nine dipoles dancing.
5. Spacetime aether structures (Higgs, dark matter, dark energy)
6. Z and W boson structures

I need to dream up a variety of compact representations of nested dipoles and personality duos. This is a geometry of assembly and it is distinct and emergent from the dynamical geometry of point charges.

Here are some very rough terminology ideas. They aren’t great, but they help illustrate the symmetries. I would like to have a parsimonious set of geometry symbols for assembly including symbols for spin and handedness. We also need transmutation operators. I vaguely envision a matrix implementation of assembly geometry. It’s good to noodle ideas like this. They may be useful some day.

• Detailed
• ‘/’ represents a high energy dipole and it’s orbital plane
• ‘n’/’s’ represents the north and south pole personality charges from the right hand rule curling fingers around the dipole orbit.
• +1/+1, +1/-1, 0/0, -1/+1, -1/-1
• p/p, p/e, 0/0, e/p, e/e where ‘p’ is positrino and ‘e’ is electrino
• Up quark : [p/e[p/p[p/p]]] | [p/p[p/e[p/p]]] | [p/p[p/p[p/e]]]
• Down quark : [e/e[p/e[p/e]]] | [p/e[e/e[p/e]]] | [p/e[p/e[e/e]]]
• Electron : [e/e[e/e[e/e]]]
• Neutrino : [e/p[e/p[e/p]]]
• Photon : [0/0[0/0[0/0]]] x [0/0[0/0[0/0]]]
• Ugh, that’s hard to parse and read.
• Abstract
• We could overload O = /, P = p/p, E = e/e, N = e/p | p/e
• Up quark : NPP | PNP | PPN
• Down quark : ENN | NEN | NNE
• Electron : EEE
• Neutrino : NNN
• Photon : OOO x OOO
• Z Boson : nNn nNn nNn
• W+ Boson : pNp pNp pNp
• W- Boson : eNe eNe eNe
• Meh, better, but still too complicated.

My intuition says we need matrices with a lot of 1’s, 0’s, and -1’s.

J Mark Morris : Boston : Massachusetts