What is a Proton? Quarks a W.S.M. approach

[Aireal]

Quarks, Asymptotic freedom and Quark containment

In my basic model of the atom I mentioned a link between the electron and the other 1/2 spin particles like the quarks. At the time I did not delve into this to deeply. My recent work on wave propagation has shed some light on this subject, so I will now go into greater detail on this matter.

I believe that quarks may be sub-harmonics of the electron wave. This would account for their fractional charges in relation to the electron and provide a means for their creation. Plus with the work on wave propagation, account for their confinement, asymptotic freedom, and other properties seen by them in experiments.

In my model of the atom I showed that the opposing loops formed by the scalar waves provide an ideal location for other standing waves to form. This quantum packet of space provides more than just a convenient location it seems. The energy density of space would be greater within this quantum packet of space than without. This is due to compression/rarefaction by the scalar waves that define the boundary of this region. Scalar waves from other electrons that entered this region would be affected by this change in density. The higher density would cause a change in amplitude and wavelength, decreasing both. When the scalar waves meet in this region a particle would form, just like in Milo's paper, only now lets call it PARTICLE X due to the change in the waves.

In my paper on wave propagation I addressed how reflection can occur at the boundary of the standing wave center to make the electron self sustaining, yet quarks do not show this property. Quarks can change from one type to another, yet the total be the same. I think I can now explain this effect.

The standing wave center has a greater energy density than the space surrounding it and this difference causes partial reflection of the wave at this boundary. In the case of PARTICLE X, the quantum packet of space they form in has a greater energy density than the surrounding region of space, but less than the standing wave center of PARTICLE X. Thus reflection will also occur at this boundary, and the Wave Density of space within this quantum packet will increase. In this case the wave energy does count as PARTICLE X is matter and is affected by this energy transfer in such a finite region continually.

As more PARTICLE X's take up residence in this quantum packet, the energy density will continue to rise. At some point this energy density will become so great that reflection stops at the boundary of the PARTICLE X's standing wave center. At this point they become completely dependent on each others out waves and reflection at the boundary defined by the opposing scalar wave fronts for their continued existence. At this point they must be in harmonic resonance with the sphere they are in and each other or it will be unstable. So PARTICLE X's that were a sub-harmonic of the electron would be favored and they would have a fractional charge. This is because the size of the quantum packet is determined by the wavelength of the electron. Let us assume than that the Quarks are sub-harmonics of the electron. Other particles could be made in this manner, and we would expect them to be unstable, the degree of which would be related to how far it was from being in harmonic resonance.

Another development of this is that one quark could change into another type with different wavelengths bouncing around. The effects of harmonic resonance would at the same time change another quarks type to maintain resonance. Even if a quark ceased to exist, one would pop into being to replace it.

Asymptotic freedom is also explained by reflection at the boundary of the standing wave center due to change in energy density. When energy is added to this system, you again create an energy density difference at the boundary of the standing wave centers causing reflection to resume, and the quarks begin to behave like particles again.

Inside this quantum packet the energy density is the same as the energy density of the quarks and acts like a particle. This is of course the proton and neutron we has described. In my model of the atom I called them Ternary Standing Wave centers. One more thing about them before we end this. The sub-harmonic waves that create quarks are created only within that finite quantum packet of space, they do not exist outside of it. This is why we do not see quarks zipping around out in free space. They are effectively confined by the manner of their creation.

Concerning the mass of protons and neutrons. As the energy density inside this quantum packet is the same as the energy density of the quarks standing wave centers, the total is far greater than that of the electron. If we look at the electron, most of the energy density moves between the center and the boundary of the standing wave, with rarefaction of energy elsewhere. The quarks on the other hand are in a soup of energy both within and without its standing wave center. Thus the protons and neutrons have far greater mass than the electron. This also accounts for the mass of the electron and proton being so close, the only difference being the energy density of the quarks which compose them, as the rest of the space within them are filled with the same degree of energy density.


Geoff - Hi Aireal. I added Proton to your title, and I corrected 10 spelling mistakes. You simply cannot publish scientific work with spelling errors - it looks really bad! Just use Google toolbar and its spellchecker (my spelling is crap, i depend on it!). And I use FireFox - it is great!

[haselhurst]

Hi Aireal,
I am very impressed with your efforts to formalise the WSM.
I am only going to make the general comment at the moment that to most people the above will seem very confusing.
I think it needs to be re-written over time AND include wave diagrams to help us feeble humans imagine what is happening (over time others will help with the diagrams!)

However, it is clear to me that you are starting to deduce things that are important.
e.g.

"The sub-harmonic waves that create quarks are created only within that finite quantum packet of space, they do not exist outside of it. This is why we do not see quarks zipping around out in free space. They are effectively confined by the manner of their creation."

Well said. And clearly a consequence of 'quarks' being wave states around wave center, rather than actual 'particles'.

Milo Wolff has written on this, and would probably agree with most of it.
I am not sure whether a proton is just an opposite phase electron (positron) with extra waves at wave center, or if proton is actually made up of many electron and positron (but with one more positron to account for charge).

Below are my comments to Milo when we discussed this about 6 months ago.
Cheers,
Geoff
----------------

Hi all,
Thanks Milo for your comments. I did a search on the internet and found the following;

"A neutron can lose a negative beta particle / electron, which converts a neutron into a proton. Or a proton can lose a positive beta particle / positron, and converts a proton into a neutron."

Is this true? This would mean that Neutrons can exist with different masses, either by a proton gaining an electron (heavy neutron), or losing a positron (light neutron).
If it is true it seems to suggest that a proton is made up of electrons and positrons (positronium). Given that the periodic table / elements are made up by adding protons together (and neutrons, electrons) until you get to a certain size and they become unstable, well this logic seems the same for creating the proton by adding electrons and positrons. Once you get to size of proton if you add electron it becomes neutral neutron, but is unstable (particularly outside of nucleus) and decays back to proton and electron (I do not know what a neutrino is - perhaps something to do with energy of wave patterns of interacting positrons and electrons in neutron!)

I have added a few more comments below in reply to Milo's comments.
And I emphasise again that I am unsure of the truth, so I am exploring ideas.
Geoff
-----------------

(Geoff wrote) HI Everyone,
I was just wondering if it is possible that a proton is made from a large number of positronium 'particles' but with one extra positron to account for positive charge. I know Milo does not agree with this - but i still find it hard to believe that a proton can have such a large mass** with only extra wave activity at wave-center (as Milo argues). It seems to me it must be made up of a lot of electrons and positrons to account for this higher mass, thus as there is such a thing as positronium (which is neutral) it may then be possible to have many positronium (electron positron couples) join together. Any thoughts? (Yes, it is speculative, I am fishing for ideas, curious what you think).


(Milo Wolff wrote) Hi all you great mathematicians:

** Before we draw conclusions, someone has to solve the Wave Equation, in toroidal (or other) coordinates, using a location at the center of a positron or electron. The large space density there would naturally yield a much higher frequency so that using E = hf = Mc2 , the mass would also be much larger - 1800 times large than the electron. i.e. the proton.

Geoff - But the frequency / mass of an electron is determined by the spherical in and out waves (it is a structure of universe) - surely this must be true for the proton too. Thus it seems to me that its extra mass cannot be just isolated to wave center waves.


Milo - One could try this working from the end backwards. i.e.
Step 1: assume the space density is such as to give ~1800 mass. Then
Step 2: find the toroidal solutions. Then
Step 3: check that they have a location as assumed in step 1.
Step 4. Find the excited states of the toroidal solution.

Excited states must exist because there are different numbers of wavelengths around the toroid. They will all have higher energy. This scenario of states match the experimental hadron 'particles'. Note that the proton is very different than an electron. It has excited states - the hadrons. ALL of them are known to decay quickly in 10^-8 seconds, to a proton. But the proton itself is known to be SUPER STABLE. It does not decay at all. Thus it is a fundamental lowest wave structure. A toroid with one wavelength around the circumference fits the picture. More = wave lengths give higher f and more mass M .

Geoff - True, but you could also get numerous excited states (complex wave functions) if proton is made from many positron / electron pairs, so Milo's argument does not differentiate between both possibilities.

................................................
If you seek to combine large numbers of positronium 'atoms' you have to postulate a means for them to couple together. Also, why are they super stable? Milo
See any way?

Geoff - Well when you have wave centers very close together it seems likely that the very high wave amplitudes at wave center would cause the short range strong nuclear 'forces'. So this would still be true for a collection of positronium 'particles'. I don't know why a certain number would be stable, but this is also true for the periodic table of elements. So we have lots to learn yet obviously.

In ending, I am not saying Milo is wrong - I just have problems with a positron (which is a structure of the universe, and its mass must be determined by the total spherical standing wave) having extra wave motions at wave center that give it ~1836 times the mass. It just makes more sense to me that it is made up of lots of positrons and electrons (with one extra positron for positive charge) to explain such a high mass.
But it is pure speculation - we need to do the maths.

Anyway, hope it helps stimulate our minds to further useful thoughts.
Geoff

Two further thoughts.

i) It also does not make sense that a proton is a positron with extra waves at wave center if a proton can loose a positron to become a neutron (it would lose itself!).

ii) If Milo is correct then you also have the problem of why only positrons have extra waves at wave center (to form proton), but electrons do not form waves at their wave center to form anti-protons.
However, if proton is a collection of positrons and electrons then this is not a problem. And this also maintains a universe that has an equal number of positrons as electrons (net charge zero) which i think is important.

Any thoughts appreciated.
Geoff

PS - Any thoughts on the difference between a hydrogen atom and a neutron (both being a proton and an electron) - I assume the electron in a hydrogen atom is further out from wave center.

[Aireal]

Geoff

This paper is probably my best effort so far to formalise W.S.M., but I had to trudge through those other two long papers of mine to reach this point.

All of the papers I have done so far are rough works that need to be rewrote and have graphs and diagrams included to help explain what I see in my mind.

However I was surprised how well this model fits the observations seen in experiments. It answers the strange ability of quarks to change types, provided a means to account for asymptotic freedom, defines how quark containment operates, and explains the mass of the proton and neutron and why their masses are so close to each other.

Overall that was more than I had hoped for, and hopefully shows I am on the right track. It also shows that no other "real" particle than the electron is needed, which personally I was happy to discover and show to others as I felt this more than any other factor was proof of Milo's work.

I was planning to extend this model to see if it holds up to explaining radioactive decay.

Also of interest in this model. As quarks are sub-harmonics of the electron, they have a differant waveleanth and mass than the electron so modern particle physics would assume they are not related to the electron when detected. The math needs to be worked out for this also.

I have a long way to go, but feel I am on the right track. Hopefully this will searve as a starting point for farther research.

[Harry Costas]

Hello All

What I see is people helping people.

This site has potential to allow people to grow with knowledge.

I see we also have spelling correcting people. We all need that.

Cannot wait to start my comments.