Screw Physics

helix archimedean screw gravity electric force magnetism

22 replies to this topic

#1 LightStorm

LightStorm

• Members
• 62 posts

Posted 22 April 2019 - 03:17 AM

The fundamental forces, like gravity, electric force and magnetism are explained via the mechanism of a screw, where a "Field Line" is interpreted as a turning screw and the direction of the linear force is obtained by the right hand rule. This simple screw mechanism was briefly alluded to by Maxwell in his famous four part paper, The Physical Lines of force.

My work can be found at the link below:

Thank you

Edited by OceanBreeze, 22 April 2019 - 06:06 AM.

#2 OceanBreeze

OceanBreeze

Creating

• Moderators
• 1073 posts

Posted 22 April 2019 - 06:07 AM

That's the third link I had to remove from your posts. You have been warned. Next time may result in a ban.

• sanctus likes this

#3 OceanBreeze

OceanBreeze

Creating

• Moderators
• 1073 posts

Posted 22 April 2019 - 06:17 AM

You can copy and paste from your book, if you like. Just don't link to it and all will be well. Thanks and welcome to Hypography!

#4 LightStorm

LightStorm

• Members
• 62 posts

Posted 22 April 2019 - 10:24 AM

You can copy and paste from your book, if you like. Just don't link to it and all will be well. Thanks and welcome to Hypography!

Thank you for your interest. I will prepare a shorter version of my work that I can share here. Thanks for the welcome.

#5 LightStorm

LightStorm

• Members
• 62 posts

Posted 23 April 2019 - 04:10 AM

I will start with gravity and magnetism because they are straightforward in the context of screws. The screws point out radially from the center of the planet or star. This means the inverse square law is intrinsic due to the said distribution. Any object that touches a screw experiences a push toward the center of the planet. (Use right hand rule, for the direction of the force). The math here is also simple, a velocity vector points to the center of the planet, and another vector is the velocity of the planet's motion. Together, a resultant vector produces an acceleration that we observe (in a projectile for eg). Kepler's second law is inherent in this setup.

Magnetism. Like poles repel, unlike poles attract. Here I use handedness. Left handed screws and right handed screws. Once again, the screws point radially outward from the center of a magnet. One half of the screws are left handed and the other half are right handed. An attraction occurs only when LHS (left handed screws) interact with another magnet's LHS. A repulsion occurs when LHS interacts with an RHS. Similarly, an attraction occurs when RHS of one magnet interacts with the RHS of another magnet. This explains, like poles attract, unlike poles repel.

Next I will explain a chemical bond. THis is a little tricky and I have several models in my mind. I've yet to finalize on which one. One model includes, the omission of orbiting electrons, since screws do not permit orbital motion. The attraction of two protons in the screw model does not need orbital motion. I am still working on this a little.

#6 LightStorm

LightStorm

• Members
• 62 posts

Posted 26 April 2019 - 05:00 AM

Electric force within the screw theory works the same as a magnetic force. That is, like poles repel, unlike poles attract. Each nucleon therefore behaves like a magnet. It has screws pointing radially outward. Half of the screws are left handed screws. While the other half consists of right handed screws. This therefore explains: like charges repel, unlike charges attract.

The screw model eliminates the need for electrons or orbiting electrons as the purpose of having two nucleons attract or repel each other is achieved by screws and its mechanics via handedness. Do you have any questions?

All I know is that I know nothing.

• Members
• 1209 posts

Posted 26 April 2019 - 06:25 PM

Left hand or right hand, there is nothing I like better than a good screw.      Here is a 2-1/2 hour long lecture on Screw Theory for anyone interested.

https://youtu.be/4XeMYPetAug?t=80

https://en.wikipedia...ki/Screw_theory

#8 exchemist

exchemist

Creating

• Members
• 2806 posts

Posted 27 April 2019 - 02:29 AM

I will start with gravity and magnetism because they are straightforward in the context of screws. The screws point out radially from the center of the planet or star. This means the inverse square law is intrinsic due to the said distribution. Any object that touches a screw experiences a push toward the center of the planet. (Use right hand rule, for the direction of the force). The math here is also simple, a velocity vector points to the center of the planet, and another vector is the velocity of the planet's motion. Together, a resultant vector produces an acceleration that we observe (in a projectile for eg). Kepler's second law is inherent in this setup.

Magnetism. Like poles repel, unlike poles attract. Here I use handedness. Left handed screws and right handed screws. Once again, the screws point radially outward from the center of a magnet. One half of the screws are left handed and the other half are right handed. An attraction occurs only when LHS (left handed screws) interact with another magnet's LHS. A repulsion occurs when LHS interacts with an RHS. Similarly, an attraction occurs when RHS of one magnet interacts with the RHS of another magnet. This explains, like poles attract, unlike poles repel.

Next I will explain a chemical bond. THis is a little tricky and I have several models in my mind. I've yet to finalize on which one. One model includes, the omission of orbiting electrons, since screws do not permit orbital motion. The attraction of two protons in the screw model does not need orbital motion. I am still working on this a little.

How does your model account for atomic spectra? Without electron orbitals, that is going to be interesting to see.

#9 LightStorm

LightStorm

• Members
• 62 posts

Posted 29 April 2019 - 12:03 AM

Left hand or right hand, there is nothing I like better than a good screw.

Heh

#10 LightStorm

LightStorm

• Members
• 62 posts

Posted 29 April 2019 - 12:12 AM

How does your model account for atomic spectra? Without electron orbitals, that is going to be interesting to see.

My model is a mesh model where all nucleons are stationary (not orbiting). The only moving parts are the screws. The mesh nature of my model allows for a particle interpretation of 'interference' and 'spectrum'. This also means, a new theory of color to go with it. (Goethe's theory of color is used in my work). I am working on a shorter version of these theories and I will post them one by one. The mesh model predicts interference on thin films the same way you see interference patterns on this office chair, which has two meshes.

Office chair

https://img.officefu...p/pd/051621.jpg

Thin film

https://opentextbc.c...e_28_07_02a.jpg

This then leads to Spectroscopy. In the mesh model, each object has a unique mesh dimension, therefore leading to unique spectra. If the object is heated its spectrum will be different than when it wasn't hot. Why? Because the dimensions change when an object is heated. Typically the dimensions become larger. Therefore there is a direct relation between mesh dimensions, heat, the object's color and its spectra. This covers spectroscopy.

Edited by LightStorm, 29 April 2019 - 12:24 AM.

#11 LightStorm

LightStorm

• Members
• 62 posts

Posted 30 April 2019 - 12:53 AM

A spectrum is a special case of interference (pattern). When white light is sent through a prism, the mesh nature of the prism molecules create interference patterns, (alternate light and dark) but our brain perceives it as a band of colors. This is in accordance with Goethe's observations on color. He observed that colors always appeared at the boundaries of light and dark bands. (Google 'dark spectrum' for more or click the link below.)

https://simple.wikip...trum-goethe.gif

Extending this logic we can say that color is a combination of light and dark is certain proportions. Say, 50% light and 50% dark is yellow color. Or 80% light and 20% dark is blue color. Assigning these values one can satisfy e = hv equation where blue is the most energetic and red the least. This means we get a new photon where darkness determines the color that we perceive. I call this photon a goeton where the percentage of darkness is accounted for.

If we see a red colored object, it looks red because its mesh on the surface create interference patterns. Owing to the darkness the mesh creates, a color is perceived by our brain. Therefore, the color of the object indirectly tells us about the dimensions of the mesh, it's temperature and composition. This is essentially spectroscopy.

The Double Slit experiment: The slit's edges act as a thin film and produce interference patterns that we see. This is a particle interpretation of interference.

Does anyone have any questions?

Edited by LightStorm, 30 April 2019 - 12:54 AM.

#12 LightStorm

LightStorm

• Members
• 62 posts

Posted 30 April 2019 - 01:08 AM

Light in this model is a piece of a screw. The screws are not 100% rigid. They constantly shed pieces off the screw. Eventually the screw loses its threading which leads to the breakdown of the electric force or magnetic force.

#13 exchemist

exchemist

Creating

• Members
• 2806 posts

Posted 30 April 2019 - 04:30 AM

A spectrum is a special case of interference (pattern). When white light is sent through a prism, the mesh nature of the prism molecules create interference patterns, (alternate light and dark) but our brain perceives it as a band of colors. This is in accordance with Goethe's observations on color. He observed that colors always appeared at the boundaries of light and dark bands. (Google 'dark spectrum' for more or click the link below.)

https://simple.wikip...trum-goethe.gif

Extending this logic we can say that color is a combination of light and dark is certain proportions. Say, 50% light and 50% dark is yellow color. Or 80% light and 20% dark is blue color. Assigning these values one can satisfy e = hv equation where blue is the most energetic and red the least. This means we get a new photon where darkness determines the color that we perceive. I call this photon a goeton where the percentage of darkness is accounted for.

If we see a red colored object, it looks red because its mesh on the surface create interference patterns. Owing to the darkness the mesh creates, a color is perceived by our brain. Therefore, the color of the object indirectly tells us about the dimensions of the mesh, it's temperature and composition. This is essentially spectroscopy.

The Double Slit experiment: The slit's edges act as a thin film and produce interference patterns that we see. This is a particle interpretation of interference.

Does anyone have any questions?

I can't follow much of this. For instance, if the colour of light is due to the proportions of light and dark, then it is not related to frequency. It is not clear that light has a frequency at all in your model. So in that case, why are you quoting Planck's relation E=hν? Or are you perhaps saying that the varying proportions of light and dark are an alternative way of arriving at the result that blue light is more energetic than red light?

Also, re spectroscopy, your idea of a mesh seems to relate to diffraction. A diffraction effect would depend on light being made of waves. But if it is just varying proportions of light and dark, how can it be a wave? Secondly, how do you account for an emission spectrum, i.e. when you have a hot substance it can emit light of particular colours? What happens inside the atoms to generate this light and what gives it its characteristic colour?

#14 LightStorm

LightStorm

• Members
• 62 posts

Posted 30 April 2019 - 04:50 AM

Or are you perhaps saying that the varying proportions of light and dark are an alternative way of arriving at the result that blue light is more energetic than red light?

Yes.

#15 exchemist

exchemist

Creating

• Members
• 2806 posts

Posted 30 April 2019 - 05:01 AM

Yes.

Does light then have a frequency, and other wavelike behaviour, in your model?

#16 LightStorm

LightStorm

• Members
• 62 posts

Posted 30 April 2019 - 05:12 AM

Also, re spectroscopy, your idea of a mesh seems to relate to diffraction. A diffraction effect would depend on light being made of waves. But if it is just varying proportions of light and dark, how can it be a wave? Secondly, how do you account for an emission spectrum, i.e. when you have a hot substance it can emit light of particular colours? What happens inside the atoms to generate this light and what gives it its characteristic colour?

My model is a particle theory of light. You are right that the mesh idea seems to relate to diffraction. Indeed every object at least at the surface is a mesh, which determines its color. Change the mesh dimensions and the object will change its color. One way of changing the dimensions of the mesh is to heat it. This will cause the spacing between each atom to increase; the atoms also vibrate releasing pieces of screw material (light). Since the mesh dimensions are larger owing to heat, the color of the object changes. Sending this light into a prism will indeed yield a different spectrum. When the object cools, its dimensions get back to normal and we see its normal color again. This is how my model accounts for spectroscopy.

#17 LightStorm

LightStorm

• Members
• 62 posts

Posted 30 April 2019 - 05:15 AM

Does light then have a frequency, and other wavelike behaviour, in your model?

My model is a particle theory of light. Think of each photon as a bullet from a machine gun. It has a frequency. But a blue photon is more energetic than a red photon because it contains less proportion of dark. It looks blue for the same reason, via Goethe's theory of color.