Unification Of The Forces, A New Aproach

[current]

Yes but they come from changes in mass as a field radiated outward, similar to normal radiation.

 

current, on 30 Aug 2020 - 9:14 PM, said:

 

Yet gravity waves move away from the source .

 

Yes but they come from changes in mass as a field radiated outward, similar to normal radiation.

Gravity waves move away from the source . Hence don't attract .

Edited August 31, 2020 by current

[devin553344]

 

Gravity waves move away from the source . Hence don't attract .

From what I read an object will move forward then back in a gravity wave and do so as if it had no momentum, kinda like passing thru a curvature. So they do cause motion (ever so slight) in the objects they pass thru. It's similar to my concept. Forward on the crest and backward on the valley. A vectored field, but it's still a variation of the gravity field.

Edited August 31, 2020 by devin553344

[current]

From what I read an object will move forward then back in a gravity wave and do so as if it had no momentum, kinda like passing thru a curvature. So they do cause motion (ever so slight) in the objects they pass thru. It's similar to my concept. Forward on the crest and backward on the valley. A vectored field, but it's still a variation of the gravity field.

But you can also go backward at the crest .

 

and forward " on the valley " .

 

And an object can move back and forward as well , in a gravity wave and does .

Edited August 31, 2020 by current

[devin553344]

I realized that gravity was a centripetal force since the field has a velocity to it. Which I then linked to magnetic moment and then amperage. The fine structure creates a PN semiconductor-like region. So I used the Shockley diode equation to calculate gravity for the electron and proton. I've updated the PDF file in the OP and will post the equations here when I get some time.

[devin553344]

The Shockley diode relationship for the proton uses 12 degrees of freedom as a temperature to kinetic energy relationship:

 

1/2 * ln((Gmp^2)/(Ke^2)) = 12/2 * εђc/e^2 * rC/rp

 

Where ln is the natural logarithm, G is the gravitational constant, mp is the proton mass, K is electric constant, e is the elementary charge, ε is the permittivity of free space, ђ is the reduced Planck constant, c is the speed of light, rC is the charge radius of the proton, rp is the wavelength of the proton.

 

The electron is a point particle and uses 9 degrees of freedom:

 

1/2 * ln((Gme^2)/(Ke^2)) = 9/2 * εђc/e^2 * re/re

 

Where me is the electron mass, re is the wavelength of the electron.

 

They both relate to the point particle and composite particle strain which is the fine structure as a temperature to voltage in a Shockley diode relationship.

 

Basically the amperage of the gravitation is really slight due to the semiconductor-like region between the charge and matter energies, as I have spelled out for the fine structure relationship of the point particle and composite particle. The charge is a hill and represents a p-type semiconductor while the matter is a valley and represents an n-type semiconductor. The standard amperage is similar to ec where e is the elementary charge and c is the speed of light, and this makes the magnetic moment of the particle when multiplied by the reduced wavelength. But the gravitation has a super tiny amperage as spelled out by the Shockley diode equation.

Edited September 4, 2020 by devin553344

[devin553344]

I've adjusted the strong force to be more realistic, I made it a pressure system which uses something like strain energy:

 

U = ђc/(2π^2r^4) * 4/3 * π * rC^3

 

Where U is the binding energy of the strong force, ђ is the reduced Planck constant, c is the speed of light, r is the radius between nucleons, rC is the charge radius of the proton.

 

The strong force for Deuteron now calculates to: 1.826E-13 Joules per nucleon, and for large atoms it calculates to 1.3E-12 Joules per nucleon.

Edited September 4, 2020 by devin553344

[devin553344]

OK, I read the Shockley diode equation wrong, now I got it correct, it is eV/kT. So I updated the equations in post #73 and the PDF file in the OP. Cheers!

[current]

I realized that gravity was a centripetal force since the field has a velocity to it. Which I then linked to magnetic moment and then amperage. The fine structure creates a PN semiconductor-like region. So I used the Shockley diode equation to calculate gravity for the electron and proton. I've updated the PDF file in the OP and will post the equations here when I get some time.

Why would not centrifugal field have a velocity to it ?

[current]

current, on 06 Sept 2020 - 11:39 AM, said:

 

Why would not centrifugal field have a velocity to it ?

 

 

The velocity is c. This was observed physically by ligo back in 2017.

So we have a centrifugal field that moves outward from the source at the speed of light , is what your saying . Edited September 6, 2020 by current

[devin553344]

Why would not centrifugal field have a velocity to it ?

Good point. Perhaps I could consider that instead.

[current]

Keep in mind that the source is the clashing of particles. So the there are new smaller fields popping up all the time. This is the vacuum energy they speak of.

Interesting and makes sense . Are these fields your are referring to Chiral Condensate ; which pop in and out all the time .

 

There is also vibrational dynamics as well .

Edited September 6, 2020 by current

[current]

With n number of coordinates, that is, finite number. The thing needs a Jupiter brain though if you want dark energy and matter.

The coordinates just repeat . Fractals repeat the same shape . The same geometry . Over and over again .

[current]

 

current, on 06 Sept 2020 - 12:14 PM, said:

 

Interesting and makes sense . Are these fields your are referring to Chiral Condensate ; which pop in and out all the time .

There is also vibrational dynamics as well .

 

No it's a 4D recurring fractal.

Define your 4 Dimensions .

 

And again what of vibration dynamics ?

[current]

Although a digital animation would be 2+1 dimensions. I can do life, which is 3+1 Ds

I can do life with 3D . Why is +1, what is this +1 ? Explain +1 .

[current]

A rule or a protocol, like a neutrino being dragged to the center of a graviton sphere if the center of given neutrino is within that graviton's spherical radius

But the graviton is theoretical particle as far as as I know ; there is no physical evidence that the graviton particle actually exists .

Edited September 6, 2020 by current

[current]

 

 

 

current, on 06 Sept 2020 - 12:52 PM, said:

 

But the graviton is theoretical particle as far as as I know ; there is no physical evidence that the graviton particle actually exists .

 

Light can only be explained by the graviton, it is energy from partially (and in the case of antimatter compositions, entirely) annihilating atoms using fission or fusion, so in a sense this is the same thing as a Lagrange point in GWs, so as the GWs meet at equal strength from opposite directions, the pull evenly disrupting the microcausality in a charge particle, this is like temperature and the GWs cannot cross each other like this unless they are actually particles in the way I described.

So is our Galactic Core made of atoms ? Quasars as well ?

[ItalyIreland3]

The event horizon has so many overlapping gravitons that the pull per planck time is over a planck length. Or the pull of a planck length occurs in less than a planck time, whichever. But that lp0 in lt0 pull doesn't effect the fractal string spheres of lp1 and lt1 if the GWs are from a singularity, however lp0 gravitons will be your dark energy and lp2 gravitons will be your dark matter/QE. 0th iteration of a fractal versus 1st iteration, used with 9^28*hG/c^3 & hG/c^5; hG/c^3; respectively. 

Edited September 6, 2020 by ItalyIreland3