Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Unification Of The Forces

Unification Strain Energy Strong Force Boiling Points

  • Please log in to reply
29 replies to this topic

#18 devin553344

devin553344

    Understanding

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 454 posts

Posted 22 June 2020 - 07:32 AM

I changed the equations back from precise calculations to 1 digit correct values. The reason I did that was because the splitting hairs method I used introduced a charge radius, which I was unsure about. And all I want to achieve is to introduce the field types that match the values at 1 digit of accuracy.

 

I have updated the OP pdf file.



#19 devin553344

devin553344

    Understanding

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 454 posts

Posted 26 June 2020 - 04:27 AM

I'm switching the electron to the following Poynting vector form which allows for a precise calculation. I still have to work on the proton gravitation, but this change allows for the field type of pressure and vacuum to be precise:

 

mec^2 = 1/2 * 48 * ε/2 * K^2 * e^2 / re * (4 * ln(rp/re))^2 = 8.2E-14 Joules

 

Where me is the electron mass, c is the speed of light, ε is the permittivity of free space, K is the electric constant, e is the elementary charge, re is the electron wavelength and rp is the proton wavelength.

 

I'm using a factor of 3 times 16. Basically the radius of charge is 1/2 the electron wavelength to the 4th power (which happens to be the pair production wavelength of the electron/positron), which would make sense for a wave packet.

 

I've updated the pdf in the OP. Cheers!

 

PS. The example of this form is located here: https://en.wikipedia...otential_energy


Edited by devin553344, 26 June 2020 - 09:23 AM.


#20 devin553344

devin553344

    Understanding

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 454 posts

Posted 27 June 2020 - 11:04 AM

I fixed the gravitation of the electron and proton (which was already precise) to match to 3 digits like the matter fields of the electron and proton and Planck's constant.

 

I simply used a Riemann zeta 3 infinite domain extender and a field length modifier that is symmetrically applied: plus for proton and minus for electron.

 

I updated the pdf file in the first page original post.



#21 devin553344

devin553344

    Understanding

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 454 posts

Posted 28 June 2020 - 07:03 AM

I updated the definition of the use of Young's modulus in this theory. It is now defined as 3 times the electric at 1/2 the wavelength. For Planck's constant it is 1 dimensional and for particles it is 3 dimensional.

 

This makes Young's modulus a constant value instead of a variable. I updated the PDF in the original first post.


Edited by devin553344, 28 June 2020 - 07:04 AM.


#22 devin553344

devin553344

    Understanding

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 454 posts

Posted 06 July 2020 - 10:00 AM

I've been trying to figure out why the two positrons and one electron in a proton (while are probably in a state of annihilation) separate to 2/3 and 1/3 charge as quarks, and I think I may have found a mathematical solution. Noting that the two up quarks decay into a positrons and the down quark into an electron:

 

(2Ke^2)/(rp/2) = 1/2 * 3mec^2 * ln^2(g^2)

 

Where K is the electric constant, e is the elementary charge, rp is the proton wavelength, me is the electron mass, c is the speed of light, ln is the natural logarithm and g is the electromagnetic coupling constant:

 

g = ((e^2)/(εђc))^1/2

 

Where ε is the permittivity of frees pace, ђ is the reduced Planck constant.

 

I've updated the PDF file in the OP.


Edited by devin553344, 06 July 2020 - 01:53 PM.


#23 devin553344

devin553344

    Understanding

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 454 posts

Posted 06 July 2020 - 07:31 PM

I was attempting to work out the magnetic moments of the electron and proton, I will state that the relativity field of any logarithmic strain energy is:

 

Em/Es = (1 - v^2/c^2)^1/2

 

Where Em is the matter energy, and Es is the energy before logarithmic strain. Therefore the field of the electron and proton is very near to perfect c as a gravity-like strong force field, this c velocity gives the charge a magnetic moment, then the electron magnetic moment is typical:

 

ue = 1/2 * e * c * re/(2π) * (1 + (Ke^2)/(hc)) = 9.284 781E-24 A*m^2

 

Where ue is the magnetic moment of the electron e is the elementary charge c is the speed of light, re is the wavelength of the electron. The magnetic moment of the proton is then:

 

up = 1/2 * e * c * rp/(4π) * ln^2(g^2) * (1 - 1/(4πexp(2)))^2 = 1.410 536E-26 A*m^2

 

Where up is the magnetic moment of the proton, rp is the wavelength of the proton, ln is the natural logarithm, g is the electromagnetic coupling constant:

 

g = ((e^2)/(εђc))^1/2

 

Where ε is the permittivity of frees pace, ђ is the reduced Planck constant.

 

The proton uses a natural logarithm of the electromagnetic coupling constant similar to what was described for the electric field of the proton. It also uses a strong force at the wavelength drop in energy.

 

The magnetic moment of the neutron uses an extra negative electron, the electron has half the electromagnetic coupling constant squared. I will leave out the strong force factor for simplicity, but it's similar to the proton:

 

un = 1/2 * e * c * rn/(4π) * ln^2(g^2) + -1/2 * e * c * rn/(4π) * ln^2(1/2 * g^2) = 9.565E-27 A*m^2

 

Where un is the magnetic moment of the neutron, rn is the wavelength of the neutron.

 

The momentum of the particle might relate to the inductive reactance of the electric field as it is strained into matter energy and bound within the wavelength.

 

I have updated the PDF file in the OP.


Edited by devin553344, 06 July 2020 - 08:58 PM.


#24 devin553344

devin553344

    Understanding

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 454 posts

Posted 13 July 2020 - 02:01 PM

I'm changing the relativity definition in the last post to the following:

 

L/L0 = (1 - v^2/c^2)^1/2

 

Where L & L0 represent wavelengths and therefore energies thru Planck's constant. The wavelengths I've used in the strain energies for the electron and proton. It may also represent time thru the frequencies.

 

Also I'm adding a supposition regarding the lifetime of particles. It basically suggests that the particle's gravitational field is a leak of the particle energy mc^2. And that the lifetime of a particle during annihilation relates to the wave period, but for the near c strong force matter trapping field it leaks thru gravitation at the rate:

 

T = (mc^2r)/(Gm^2f)

 

Where T is the lifetime of the particle, m is the mass of the particle, c is the speed of light, r is the Compton wavelength of the particle, G is the gravitational constant, f is the frequency of the Compton wavelength of the particle which represents the normal period for pair annihilation.

 

The proton then has a lifetime of 1.5E+08 years. And the electron at 2.0E+17 years.

 

I updated the PDF file in the OP in post #1.


Edited by devin553344, 16 July 2020 - 11:29 PM.


#25 devin553344

devin553344

    Understanding

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 454 posts

Posted 16 July 2020 - 11:29 PM

I'm considering two relativity forms, one for wave and the other for particle. So I may propose both.

 

Where the wave relativity is:

 

L/L0 = (1 - v^2/c^2)^1/2

 

Where L and L0 are wavelengths that also represent energies thru Planck's constant.

 

And the particle relativity is:

 

1/ϵ^2 = (1 - v^2/c^2)^1/2

 

Where ϵ is the logarithmic strain.

 

The wave-particle duality is now described as follows. I've described wave as related to Planck's constant and particle as related to strain energy:

 

E = hc/r = 1/2 * V * E * ϵ^2

 

Where E is the energy of the wave, h is Planck's constant, c is the speed of light, r is the wavelength, V is the volume, E is Young's modulus which relates to the electric energy of the elementary charge, ϵ is the logarithmic strain.

 

I've updated the PDF file in the OP. Cheers!
 


Edited by devin553344, 17 July 2020 - 02:32 AM.


#26 devin553344

devin553344

    Understanding

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 454 posts

Posted 18 July 2020 - 02:44 PM

I've updated the OP PDF file with a relativistic orbiting electron that explains the neutron mass increase. I used it also to describe the Deuteron energy and charge radius.



#27 devin553344

devin553344

    Understanding

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 454 posts

Posted 21 July 2020 - 11:38 AM

OK, today I've been working on momentum and the originin of relative velocity of particles. What I found is a relationship to the strong force field velocity of c. The gravitation has a vectored velocity field that is balanced inward in all directions that promotes gravitation. The strong force is basically a gravitation with a c velocity in all directions inward. These balanced fields do not promote a velocity for the particle, unless there is a neighboring particle along a vector, then they gravitate.

 

What I'm now going to describe is a portion of that strong force c velocity as a linear direcitonal vector field known as the DeBroglie wavelength (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_wave). The ratio is then:

 

rC/rD = v/c

 

Where rC is the Compton wavelength of the particle (https://en.wikipedia...pton_wavelength), and rD is the DeBroglie wavelength of the particle, v is the velocity of the particle, and c is the speed of light which is the velocity of mc^2 which is the strong force energy field.

 

This states that motion happens as a result of a vectored strong force velocity field, who's domain is the DeBroglie wavelength. The DeBroglie wavelength stretches out a type of the Compton wavelength to create a portion of c. The strong force domain is the Compton wavelength and leaks just shortly beyond via a decay structure.

 

I've updated the OP PDF field and added a magnetic idea, that basically might state that a magnetic field might alter the vectored velocity field of the strong force and promote velocity of a particle in open space. I still have to look at that idea some more though.


Edited by devin553344, 21 July 2020 - 11:42 AM.


#28 devin553344

devin553344

    Understanding

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 454 posts

Posted 21 July 2020 - 01:31 PM

Dubbelosix gave me an idea of the equivalence principle (http://www.sciencefo...or-inertiamass/) (https://en.wikipedia...lence_principle) that I could simply apply a wavelength delta to show an equivalence between strong force wave energy and inertia and the velocity and momentum, from there acceleration should be easy. Using my equation above to adjust the Compton wavelength and therefore the strong force curvature:

 

E = pc = mc^2 * rC/rD

 

Where E is the relativistic energy component of the momentum, p is the momentum, c is the speed of light, m is the mass of the particle wave, rC is Compton wavelength, rD is DeBroglie wavelength. This works since in my theory mc^2 is the raw strong force binding energy exposed thru a decay structure.

 

Therefore:

 

p = mv = mc * rC/rD


Edited by devin553344, 21 July 2020 - 01:41 PM.


#29 devin553344

devin553344

    Understanding

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 454 posts

Posted 24 July 2020 - 02:47 AM

I removed the Boiling Point section of the theory. I had originally thought that Boiling Points could control the evaporation of matter for the reduction in binding energies. But now I'm switching to the idea that any mass reduction caused by binding comes from a curvature interaction of matter fields, which includes kinetic energies dominated by the DeBroglie curvature reduction mechanism. I've adjusted the theory to demonstrate this concept.

 

With this new idea, E=mc^2 only applies to matter fields and does not apply to electromagnetic fields. The general idea is that the speed of light in the E=mc^2 comes from the logarithmic strain of matter fields, such that the true equation is 2 * 1/2 * m * v^2 for a spherical radiative matter source.

 

Linear Kinetic Energy = 1/2 * m * v^2

 

Spherical Logarithmic Strain Energy for Particles = m * c^2

 

The PDF file in the OP is updated.


Edited by devin553344, 24 July 2020 - 02:53 AM.


#30 devin553344

devin553344

    Understanding

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 454 posts

Posted 25 July 2020 - 03:27 PM

I came to the realization that electrons orbiting a nucleus don't radiate because accelerating charges don't radiate. The radiation from an accelerating charged particle comes from changes to the DeBroglie wavelength and relate to Planck's constant instead.

 

The equation I found relates to my gravitational equations for the electron and proton as a curvature leak, but instead is applied to my Planck equation from electric planes of charge. This uses the electromagnetic coupling constant squared:

 

2/3 * Ke^2/c^3 * a^2 = h/c^2 * a^2 * exp^3(ln((e^2)/(εђc)))

 

Where K is the electric constant, e is the elementary charge, c is the speed of light, a is the acceleration of the particle, h is Planck's constant, ε is the permittivity of free space, ђ is the reduced Planck's constant.

 

I've updated the PDF file in the OP.

 

And the gravitation of the photon is a hill of charge, instead of a valley of mass. Like charges repel instead of attract. This allows the electric curvature to extend to infinity. Simply remove the acceleration in the above equations for the Larmor formula and adjust for wavelength energy and you have a full unification theory:

 

2/3 * Ke^2/r = hc/r * exp^3(ln((e^2)/(εђc)))

 

Where r is the wavelength.





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Unification, Strain Energy, Strong Force, Boiling Points