Senior Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

-11 Bad

About Butch

  • Rank
  • Birthday 10/13/1955

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Tampa, FL
  • College Major/Degree
    A.S. Computers 1976 (weird science at the time)
  • Favorite Area of Science
    Theoretical physics
  • Biography
    Fool on the hill
  • Occupation
    Commercial fisherman

Recent Profile Visitors

5476 profile views
  1. Structure v Properties

    Quarks are said to have no internal structure, however there are many types of quarks. On the face it would seem that they are defined by properties (Mass, Spin, Charge), how do we differentiate between properties and structure when many properties are defined by particles?
  2. Just a thought...

    Thanks for the link. I think they are over complicating by using the standard model as a guidepost, best advice you gave me was that my particle did not necessarily belong in the standard model. Still having trouble determining a value for x=1, but making progress... Problem is determining mass density as well as the concept of the dimensions of the well being infinite. In terms of math the slope at x=1 is 1 what is the slope at sea level on earth? It should be very close to 0.
  3. Just a thought...

    Could it be that quarks have internal structure that we are not aware of? I suppose 2/3 would be incorrect in any case, charge would be 1/3. That is of course if quarks have internal structure. Have you seen the news concerning the detection of "ghost" particles?
  4. Just a thought...

    I was speaking more in terms of Schrödinger's cat, when I said " indeterminate", it was unnecessary. More important is the quantity of charge, does this thought relate to quarks in any way? Might it? I saw in recent news the detection of a ghost particle, is this a less massive neutral particle than a neutrino?
  5. Just a thought...

    A single particle has an indeterminate charge as charge can be said to be relative. Two particles with opposite charges but bound in a system consisting of the two has a neutral charge. Three particles, one with an unlike charge bound in a system has a 2/3 charge? I am referring to composite particles. Comments?
  6. I believe what I need to address first is this... Since the particle actually extends to infinity, with its mass spread to infinity, any point at any distance relative to the origin point falls within the particle. Ignoring space/time dilation for the moment, how would I modify 1/x^2? I realize at a large distance this effect would be negligible, however I need to work close to the origin for now.
  7. Light and the event horizon?

    Exactly what I was looking for! Thx!
  8. Can someone show the math that describes light being trapped at the event horizon? Perhaps link? Googling this does not provide good mathematical descriptions.
  9. You are correct sir! I began this thread with an inquiry and let things get out of hand. When I make such inquiries in the future, I will be more careful. Thank you. Thank you, actually I am aware of this, however awarness is not competence... I may need some help. Right now I need to resolve the issue of scale. How "big" is my particle... That is to say how does the gravitational profile of this point particle compare to the earth or a black hole??
  10. Sorry you misunderstood, I am saying that x=1 on my chart is a very large number in terms of n. I think there may be a connection... Do you recall my statement in another topic "photons are wave packets in a gravitational field."? Swansont said I would have to show that, that is my endeavor. Just keep beating on me Strange, you are one of my favorite guideposts!
  11. X=distance Y=gravitation I am speculating that very near a particle gravity could be a much stronger force than we have given credit. 1 in terms of Newtons would be close to the gravitational force at the event horizon of a black hole, actually, it could be much stronger... And as the value of x falls below 1 it is very much stronger. At these levels gravity would be a very strong force rivaling the other known forces, even perhaps unifying them. The real problem I am having with this model, is describing charge in terms of gravitational force. This was an attempt at doing so, it failed and so I move on. The tasks in front of me now are resolving my units and determining how a particle as a gravity well can exhibit charge. You are correct, I will drop this until I have made progress on those tasks. Thank you, Strange! Thank you all!
  12. How so? Here is a chart showing that if my particles were perturbed as shown in my earlier charts, the perturbation would not represent charge of the particle. This is a representation of two "positively charged" particles. Note that the gravitational force between them is above 0 on the y axis, this would represent negative g, a repulsive force... Ergo this cannot represent charge. OOPS!!! They should repel... Just a moment and I will post the chart for 2 negative particles... Here the gravitational force between them is amplified and attractive, two negatively charged particles should repel.
  13. My statements are speculations, that is why they are prepositioned with words like "might be", "could be" and "if". As far as gravity is weaker than gravity... I am saying that gravitational force at very close proximity to x=1 or within that horizon is much stronger than in our normal experience. I am working on what x=1 is, I will need to do a comparison of mass densities between the Earth and a particle. See my response to your last reply... Give me a few minutes and I will post the charts.
  14. If you will observe the plot of my gravity well particle not that in the proximity of the particle, gravitational force is much greater than what we would expect from experience. For those of you who took notice of my charged particle plots and say that this does not demonstrate charge... You are correct. I plotted my "charged" particles as they relate to one another in proximity. I found that the positive repelled the positive, the negative attracted the negative and unlike charges had no influence. I do believe that my particles could be perturbed in this way, however it certainly does not represent charge... perhaps color? At any rate it has lead me to some ideas on spin as relates to my particle, I will present this in a new topic, when I can. I do not think you people realize what a great help you are to me, I know I thank you all the time, I am not trying to placate you... You really are that helpful! Thank you... again and again!