Proof For The Mechanism

Update: Actually that experiment must be done between N-N or S-S magnetic poles. TOEBI 2.0 released later will explain why.

I figured out a pretty easy way to prove TOEBI description for particle interactions. You need only a magnetic field, a laser and a decent photodetector. According to TOEBI, the mechanism behind the attractive force between magnetic poles is due to a spinning vector pattern which allows the accumulation of FTEPs on the electron’s side facing the other magnetic pole.

Accumulation of FTEPs means an increased FTE density which has its consequences… for example, if we send light into this increased FTE density it would experience “gravitational” blue shifting. Those quotes are used because in reality we are not increasing the mass which normally causes the phenomenon,  but we are increasing the FTE density due to those colliding FTEP fluxes from electrons in each magnetic pole.

The greatest increase of the FTE density happens near the interacting electrons, hence the blue shifting phenomenon should be observable near those electrons (a.k.a. near the surfaces of the poles). How big the blue shifting will be? I can’t answer that at the moment because I’m not done with the FTEP dynamics research yet. Picture below describes the experimental setup.

mechanism_experimentLaser shoots photons with known wavelength into the magnetic field as close as possible to one of the poles. Laser is outside the magnetic field. Photodetector must be put inside the magnetic field so that it can detect the blue shifted light. If the photodetector is put outside the magnetic field the light coming out of the magnetic field experiences red shifting (due to decreased FTE density) and the photodetector measures the initial wavelength coming from the laser.

If one puts up the described experimental setup it would be reasonable to make measurements throughout the whole gap between the poles. Electromagnet would be also nice, one could alter the force between the poles and see how it affects the predicted blue shifting phenomenon. Of course, increasing the force can be done with permanent magnets by decreasing the gap between the poles.

If the predicted blue shifting is detected it supports the TOEBI mechanism behind particle interactions, in this case between electrons.

Update: At least MRS photodiode won’t suffer from strong magnetic fields.

The Great Filter II

I have been talking about the topic previously and unfortunately more the time has passed and more I have studied TOEBI then bleaker our future appears. Gamma ray burst due to the full blown particle destruction chain reaction a.k.a. The Great Filter is about to hit us. It can happen anytime and we can’t do anything about it. So now you understand the bleak part of our future.

What do I mean with that we can’t do anything about it? Well… we can’t stop the scientific progress, can we? I doubt it. How could we? In case of The Great Filter I’m referring at the development of particle physics. Mainstream particle physicists are not stupid, eventually they will realize the same thing than I have realized, you can annihilate particle without producing, through high energy process, its antiparticle. You only have to realize what’s behind the particle spin and that’s not too big of step from today’s knowledge.

Every sensible individual understands what to do, right? Just don’t go in there! Just don’t! The problem is that mainstream physicists don’t know about this potentially devastating risk involved with their experiments. On the other hand, how do one inform and warn about it? It’s like talking to a deaf ears… ironic.

Let’s imagine that for some miracle reason we manage to stop the scientific progress. Do you think that would concern a secret military research programs or otherwise mentally defected dictators etc from developing antimatter based doomsday devices? That’s right… we are about to hit The Great Filter.

And just FYI Elon Musk, you can’t escape The Great Filter by habiting Mars, gamma ray burst most likely annihilates nearby planets too. What can I say? At least we shouldn’t worry about little things and we should enjoy our lives as much as possible. In case you don’t believe in my message that’s one way to go, after all, ignorance is bliss.

Galaxy Rotation Curve – v2.0

You are most likely familiar with the concept of galaxy rotation curve, so I cut to the point. We don’t need dark matter to hold up our more or less constant orbital velocities (measured values in line B), we better call it FTEPs from now on…

Picture from Wikipedia

Centripetal force, which keeps those stars on their orbits, behaves like this \[F = \frac{mv^2}{R}\] and in this case the force is generated by \[F = \frac{GmM}{R^2}\] What’s the problem? Let’s see \[\frac{mv^2}{R} = \frac{GmM}{R^2}\] so we get \[\text{constant} \approx v^2 = \frac{GM}{R}\]

We pretty much know how normal matter is distributed around a disk galaxy, and therefore mainstream physics has stumbled on the matter (pun unintended) and hit its head on dark matter.

If you look at the issue from TOEBI POV the answer is (now) obvious! If velocity stays pretty much stable and \(G\) won’t increase at the same rate as distance then something’s gotta give! It’s the mass, but not the mass we can observe directly, hence scientists call it as dark matter. Particle mass emerges from particle’s surface area (linked to its cross section), spinning frequency and the amount of FTEPs it can bound to itself by those first two ingredients.

Space itself is filled with FTEPs. Around mass concentrations most of these FTEPs are leftovers from the together gathered particles, mass defect in greater scale so to speak. FTEPs themselves clump together pretty weakly if at all, so when orbiting stars deflect FTEPs around the highest velocity FTEPs go towards the outer parts of a galaxy in plane wise manner. Observed wave patterns in galaxy arms might emerge from these millions of FTEP deflection phenomena along the galaxy arms.

At some point, deflected FTEPs starts to build up due to lost momentum, pretty much similarly than in case of some particle interactions described by TOEBI. Nevertheless, the outcome from increased FTE density will be an increased gravitational interaction as described in The Mechanism blog post.

What I now need to do is to calculate how things would emerge for example in our galaxy according to the above description. Before that I have to finish off my current project on FTEP dynamics.

Length of Day

Variations on Earth’s length of day (LOD) is most likely the reason for the different measurements of \(G\). You can read more about the variations of LOD from article. Anyway, the variation is the magic word!

Let’s picture our Earth as an electron… spinning and minding its own business and all the sudden its spinning frequency changes. What would happen in case of electron? Let’s say that the spinning frequency increases a tiny fraction, say \(1.001 * f_{e}\). We already know that due to electron’s huge spinning frequency (\(f_{e} = 8.98755179*10^{16}\) 1/s) and tiny size changes in the amount of circulating and bound FTEPs happen pretty quickly. In case of spinning frequency increase the amount of FTEPs bound to electron increases, hence electron mass would increase till there exists an equilibrium with the spinning frequency and the amount of bound FTEPs.

Earth’s spinning frequency increase would increase also the amount of circulating and Earth bound FTEPs on top of the amount already bound to Earth mass. But due to Earth’s size and slow spinning frequency those changes on the amount of FTEPs won’t happen that quickly at all. What happens before the equilibrium between spinning frequency and the amount of additional bound FTEPs is achieved?

Increased spinning frequency would mean that outwards FTEP flow (in planet scale) would be greater than inwards FTEP flow. Inwards flow will eventually catch up. Based on article that catching up might take as long as couple of months. During that time particles bound to Earth experience a situation where outwards flux consumes FTEPs around them and generate increased pressure on those particles’ sides perpendicular to Earth’s center of mass which is detected by sensitive \(G\) measurements during those months. During those months inwards flux gets stronger and eventually the equilibrium is achieved and \(G\) measurements converge towards its mean value.

In case of decreased Earth’s spinning frequency things go reverse. There will be a temporary excess of FTEPs surrounding Earth’s mass and also the pressure around the sides of particles perpendicular to Earth center of mass is decreased due to decreased Earth’s spinning frequency. All this generates the illusion of the increased value for \(G\) as described in previous blog post. Again, the equilibrium state between inwards and outwards fluxes will be achieved during the following months and \(G\) settles down.

On top of \(G\) measurements when Earth’s spinning frequency increases or decreases I suggest that measurements should be done also when decrease happens a few months after the previous decrease (no increases in between).

Variations of G

Retired JPL physicist John D Anderson is back! He has, with his colleagues/team, found the linkage between LOD (Length Of Day) and the measured values of gravitational constant \(G\). LOD variations mean variations with the spinning frequency of Earth, ah, my first crush 😉 You better read the whole paper from IOPscience.

The conclusion is that smaller the Earth’s spinning frequency greater the value of G. How is that possible? Or I should ask, how is that possible according to TOEBI? Because mainstream physics is pretty clueless about the question. There is no apparent reason why Earth’s spinning frequency, caused by Earth originated reason, should affect conventional laboratory measurements of \(G\). By using quantum mechanical based measurements results differ, why? At least free fall measurements won’t suffer from the following mechanism.

So, let’s see what TOEBI can offer… at this point, qualitative. Relevant background information can be found from my previous blog posts (Dark Side – Part I & The Mechanism). Why smaller spinning rate of Earth increases the value of \(G\)?  All the involved masses stay the same… first I thought that there would be changes with masses due to the possible changed FTE density caused by the decreased Earth’s spinning rate.

Because the smaller Earth’s spinning rate the amount of the ejected/deflected surrounding FTEPs is smaller. That indeed might change the FTE density (decrease) throughout Earth (in principle detectable phenomenon) but that’s not affecting the \(G\) measurements by itself. However, there is another effect due to the decreased FTEP ejection/deflection.

Spinning particles generate a denser local FTE around them which is shown to us as particle mass, greater amount of FTEPs around an elementary particle means a higher mass for it. In special conditions, generated by high energy particle collisions, elementary particle can temporarily hold larger amount of these FTEPs around itself, e.g. muon. Nevertheless, the shape of those local particle FTE “bubbles” without any interacting outside FTEPs would be totally spherical.

Gravitating object most certainly affects the FTE “bubble” shape of a particle, it generates higher FTE density on the particle’s side facing it. This is all described in those linked previous blog posts. Those, because of Earth spinning, deflected FTEPs shape those particle FTE “bubbles” too! They might distribute to the gravitational interaction (on the short scale probably not, this requires whole new blog post) but on top that they generate higher FTE density/pressure on the “sides” perpendicular to the gravitating object. Now you probably realize the mechanism how reduced Earth’s spinning rate affects the measured \(G\) values…

…In case you didn’t. Reduced FTE density/pressure (due to reduced Earth’s spinning rate) on the particles sides perpendicular to the gravitating object allows larger amount of particle’s FTEPs to spread on those sides (for a while! – new blog post is coming on the phenomenon). Now two macro world objects can share more of their FTEPs which causes the higher gravitational interaction between them, hence generate the illusion of the increased value for \(G\).

Published paper opens whole new perspectives for TOEBI development.

Update (6/5/2015): Check out also Matthew Pitkin’s paper about the paper.

Dark Side – Part I

Dark matter has been heavily on the focus now that LHC is starting once again. Matt Strassler is putting up a nice collection of articles about it and how LHC might detect the mysterious matter. So I started to think about how TOEBI handles dark matter and, in future part II, dark energy.

According to TOEBI gravitational interaction is experienced through FTE, you can check up the mechanism from one of my previous post. In this post, I’m going to describe how the mechanism works in a greater scale and hence create the illusion of dark matter. From TOEBI’s point of view, there is two separate phenomenon acting, gravitational interaction enhancement between stellar objects due to circular motion (orbiting) and stellar object rotation and in some cases (e.g. bullet clusters), FTE displacement.

Let’s start with the gravitational interaction enhancement. When I started with TOEBI I erroneously thought that gravitational interaction is solely based on stellar object’s rotation. But I learned that it’s not! However, stellar object’s rotation can distribute to gravitational interaction, just like two spinning particles interacts with each other. When we are talking about rotating stellar objects the spinning rates are way much smaller. Nevertheless, the size of interacting area of stellar objects (cross section) is way much larger.

The ratio of gravitational enhancement due to rotation and “normal” gravitational interaction between Sun and Earth would be \[\frac{G_{Earth}*A_{Sun}*A_{Earth}}{1.9891*10^{30}*5.97219*10^{24}*6.67384*10^{-11}}\]where \(G_{Earth}=0.5*f_{Earth}^2\approx 6.7347*10^{-11}\), \(A_{Earth}\approx 1.275*10^{14}\) and \(A_{Sun}\approx 1.523*10^{18}\). \(G_{Sun}\) is omitted due to its insignificancy. Units are omitted on purpose. So what we got? The ratio is approximately \(1.65*10^{-23}\). We can safely say that the gravitational enhancement effect from stellar object’s rotation is minuscule.

How about stellar object orbiting? The effect from orbiting to the object itself is obvious. In steady orbit, gravitational pull generated by the mechanism  (a.k.a. normal gravitational interaction) is in balance with the force generated by the displacement of incoming FTE. Because the trajectory bends constantly, the larger portion of the incoming FTE is directed to the side opposing the orbit’s center. Higher the object’s velocity and curvature larger portion of the incoming FTE(Ps) go (are deflected) to the “outer” side. In steady orbit, the amount of FTE at the “outer” side matches the FTE density difference generated by the larger gravitating object, e.g. our Sun.

So far so good. But what if we scale up to our solar system level and study the phenomenon described above? For example, we have our Sun and bunch of planets, dwarf (always funny) planets and asteroids… which are orbiting the center of our galaxy. However, Sun rules the mass of our solar system. Now we are approaching the interesting part. The amount of FTE(Ps) deflected by our solar system, or let’s just say deflected by our Sun is massive and those FTEPs goes “out” most heavily in a plane. Actually that plane effect explains partially why rotating galaxies (or solar systems) are more or less discs or are forming into that shape. Can you see what’s coming…?

Every star near the central bulb on a rotating galaxy distributes on this deflection of FTEPs, larger the orbit’s radius higher the star’s orbital velocity, hence higher the deflected FTEPs’ velocity. Stars in a galaxy arms have even bigger orbital radius and they pass on those previously deflected FTEPs. However, based on observations, dark matter (= FTEPs) doesn’t go on without any interactions. At some point, their velocity slows down and areas with higher FTE density emerge, higher the FTEPs’ velocity larger the distance FTEPs can travel radially before they start to clump.

Higher FTE density means in practice that the stars on those galaxy arms experience higher gravitational interaction than they should based on purely the visible matter. Described phenomenon is behind the flat velocity curve on those those rotating galaxies.

I’ll continue later.

Taming The Rotation

What prevents the large scale proton annihilations in case of two solid blocks of hydrogen? Although a solid block of hydrogen might provide the needed support for keeping those spinning vectors in wanted orientation it also provides an environment which induces the rotation for those enclosed protons a.k.a. proton electrons. Such a rotation phenomenon ruins the chances for the accurate contact between two lattices put together.

What can be done about the rotation? Obviously it must be tamed, but how? This needs further research.

Proton vs. Neutron

According to TOEBI, both protons and neutrons consist of three plain vanilla electrons. As we know protons and neutrons behave differently if we put them into a magnetic field. In this post we go through some properties and differences between protons and neutrons.

First of all, both particles have approximately the same mass, \(1.67262178*10^{-27}\) kg for proton and \(1.67492735*10^{-27}\) kg for neutron. Why neutron is a bit heavier than proton if both are constructed by three electrons? What reduces neutron’s charge? These two questions might have the same answer.

Let’s start from the basics. How three electrons manage to stay together when they normally would repel each other away? Obviously something prevents the expected behaviour and most likely it’s the FTE density outside the three electrons, at least it’s difficult to invent anything else compatible with TOEBI ideas. It means that the FTE density in between the electrons must be lower than the outer density because if it were higher, the density would prevent the stable system. Just like a nucleus generates high enough FTE density which blocks electrons from crashing into it.

According to previously described mechanism those three electrons experience acceleration outwards their system, but the higher outer FTE density prevents them from escaping the system, hence protons and neutrons are stable. Well, neutrons are stable only in nucleus and also that phenomenon needs an explanation.

What kind of setups those three electrons can possess inside proton or neutron? Based on proton and neutron behaviour in a magnetic field there is two possible setups, either they all have the parallel spinning vector orientations (u-u-u) or one of the electrons has antiparallel spinning vector orientation compared to others (u-u-d). How come? Well, the spinning vectors can’t be at random orientations because protons’ and neutrons’ consistent behaviour in a magnetic field. Ok then, which setup belongs to proton and which one to neutron? Neutrons react in lesser extend to a magnetic field than protons, that’s a clue… In TOEBI, the only reasonable mechanism explaining that would be that neutrons have two electrons with parallel spinning vector orientations and one electron with antiparallel spinning vector orientation (u-u-d). Such a setup would reduce neutron’s reactivity in a magnetic field (e.g. \(g\)-factor). One electron works against the other two which leads to the observed reduced charge of neutron.

How do these two different electron spinning vector orientation setups affect proton and neutron mass? What exactly is particle mass? In TOEBI papers I have defined mass as being the cross section of a particle. But that’s not the whole truth, also the amount of FTEPs contained around the particle matters, it must matter. If we take a look at for example muon and tau particles, both of them have an underlying electron at their core surrounded by a larger amount of FTEPs than in case of electron, hence muon and tau have the bigger mass than electron. However, those heavier versions of electrons lose their excess FTEPs pretty quickly according to their decay patterns. The bottom line is that the particle mass includes also those FTEPs associated with the particle (spherical object having the boundary where background FTE density equals the lowest FTE density of the particle).

Back to the differences between proton and neutron. Does the electron spinning vector orientation setup of neutron (u-u-d) generate the bigger mass ( = more FTEPs contained) than proton’s setup (u-u-u)? If so, why? Observably the electron spinning vector orientation setup of neutron generate bigger mass than of proton’s.

The reason for neutron’s bigger mass must be related to the larger distances between neutron’s inner electrons which is due to lower FTE density in between the electrons compared to proton’s. Proton’s three electrons have a parallel spinning vector orientation which generates higher inner FTE density than neutron’s three electrons (u-u-d). Proton’s higher inner FTE density means that the density difference between the inner and outer volume is smaller than of neutron’s which leads to the smaller acceleration for those three electrons, hence the smaller distances between proton’s electrons.

Neutron’s a bit larger volume compared to proton’s is due to a bit larger distances between the inner electrons. How much is the difference? Unfortunately I haven’t developed TOEBI further enough in order to answer that. Nevertheless, above description is TOEBI’s view on proton and neutron.

What makes neutron decay when out of atom nucleus? Why can’t neutron and electron create an atom? I think those questions deserve the blog post of their own!

Greetings from Lapland! Conditions for viewing planets and other targets in nightly sky were excellent. Light pollution was minimal and on couple of nights the sky was crystal clear and seeing was great. It was just perfect!

FQXi Essay Contest – Spring, 2015

Once again FQXi Community put up an essay contest, this time with theme Trick or Truth: the Mysterious Connection Between Physics and Mathematics. I have pondered the issue previously so I decided to participate the contest. My essay, “Mathematics, Physics and Nature” looks at the connection through TOEBI glasses and hopefully it receives constructive and interested feedback from the other contestants. In couple of days my essay will be visible and also you can participate the conversation in FQXi’s contest forum.

So, what’s my essay all about? As you probably already know, Force Transfer Ether (FTE) plays a huge role in TOEBI. FTE enables particle interactions and its density affects the magnitude of interactions as well as the rate of measured time. I tried to put all the interesting and relevant information regarding FTE into the essay but in reality an accurate explanation and coverage would require a series of books and tons of additional work.

Writing my essay explains partially the recent silence in TOEBI blog and I also recently purchased Celestron Omni XLT 127 telescope… needless to say, fooling around with quality telescope consumes enormous amounts of time. Luckily it’s a hobby for whole family!

Status Report

It’s about time to make a status report… What’s going on? What will happen?

Nothing big is happening. My CERN contact is working but I haven’t heard any news so far. We’ll see… I haven’t got any extra time for TOEBI development. It’s hard to make a progress when most of my time goes into other activities. This can’t go like this, I need a sponsor (governmental, foundation, private person or private company) who is willing to gamble with my antimatter idea. Positive outcome would guarantee adequate funding for TOEBI development, that’s for sure.

I’m going to focus, at least for now, on hunting such a sponsor. General development of TOEBI can wait, I have nothing to win from that activity. All the rest available time goes into developing experiments related to my antimatter idea. So it might be that my activity in TOEBI blog goes down, at least temporarily.