Jump to content

Kartazion

Senior Members
  • Content Count

    36
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Kartazion

Profile Information

  • Location
    France

Recent Profile Visitors

227 profile views
  1. I have re-drawn the curve to avoid infinity.
  2. Good evening studio. Let's say really fast, but not infinite, because if this velocity is infinite at x = 0 we can not have duly determined velocity. The particle moves according to x and goes from for example, from -0.01 to 0.01 quickly. On the x-axis -0.01 and 0.01 being determined velocities for the particle. So its acceleration and velocity is determined at x = 0 if the particle stay in passing half a nanosecond for example. How to go from a determined speed (-0.01 for x) to infinity (x = 0) and then return to a determined speed (0.01 for x)? If the velocity at x = 0 is infinite, or not, does this change the shape of the equation between the two choices?
  3. I start from the principle where v0 is the velocity when x=0. But since I do not know much, we'll see. However I have another problem to raise. I know very well that a and b are constants. But it would be necessary for a to become a variable, or to use a second constant named e linked to a if a remains a constant. Indeed I wish to use these conditions in the equation: ax if x⩾1 ax if x⩾-1 and ex if x<1 ex if x<-1 This allows me to force the acceleration of the particle when x tends to 0. Here is the desired curve: I would like to keep the form of the equation except that when ax approaches ~1 (0.999...) for x, then the constant a changes its value (a becomes e) Maybe it should be two constants related to extrapolated values written as eax? Or is there another solution? Sorry for not being able to express myself better.
  4. I had warned that thread was going to be based on speculative. My only support is this one: https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/120416-anharmonic-oscillator/
  5. I did not know anything. It is the mechanics of the oscillator that brought me to this conclusion. The scope of gravity is infinite. So all the particles are there. But the question arises when an object leaves the earth. It can be relayed by another system, such as the sun. I also use this principle of oscillation between singularity and stars with the supermassive black holes and the galactic loop. In this case, and in between two, the flow of the particle becomes dark matter? In fact the real path of the prticule is this one: big-bang -> supermassive black hole -> star -> planet It's pure speculation but the sun is the point of origin of our solar system and manages all the objects that are there. The point of origin of the particle oscillating between sun and center of the earth. There should be a sunspot in the axis of every planet.
  6. Yes. That's why I opened the Anharmonic Oscillator thread.
  7. Yes I admit. I made a mistake by using the term singularity. Let's say rather a convergent point according to the terrestrial gravity field.
  8. Yes A gravitational singularity. I do not see where the problem is.
  9. This is the only solution to converge the information and the electrical charges of the system, and to regroup at one point the set of sequences of controlled oscillations. I simply associated the acceleration of the particle to mass in eV. My model defines the type of particle when it is at rest, because the oscillator gives the particle a total stop of its movement in time with a very short life span. A singularity of transition and gravitation.
  10. Yes I know. But I still try to make an approach as such. The single particle atom is radiative. Indeed, its oscillation is along an axis, and not a circle or sphere as orbital. Radiation can propagate between the points A->B A->B' A->B'' A->B''' for example. But I will think about it. How can we know it? In addition, the singularity of which I speak is that of the center of the earth for example. A perpetual oscillation of the particle between the center of the earth and the atom. Indeed this is problematic. But in my case the electron becomes more massive when it dissociates from its orbit and become as heavy as a proton. rather as heavy as a quark.
  11. Hello This thread is pure speculation of an unknown physics phenomenon (optical illusion type). I do not expect any answer or help, because all this should remain for the moment incomprehensible of all. I created only this thread for archive and continuation if there will be. Thank you. The atomic model described in this thread represents the synopsis of the logical sequence of the oscillation mechanism of a single moving particle. Reference: https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/120416-anharmonic-oscillator/ I - Anharmonic Oscillator Here is the diagram of the anharmonic feature of the particle. Its oscillation is between singularity and visible matter, where between two its acceleration would be almost infinite. Here is the diagram of the path taken by the particle in the oscillator, as well as the role of the particle in the representation of the atom: Example of an atomic particle according to its delivered energy: II – Quantum atom The quantum atom is basically composed of quantum jump method of the particle, between singularity and correlation of the mass. These jumps correspond to the Bottom-up oscillation and are of almost instant value. They can be of the order of a few million jumps in a nanosecond. The exclusion of Pauli is respected because there is only one particle present per atom created by reiteration. Pure quantum atom, and series reiteration of Neutrons Protons (same number of N than of P): Isotope-type quantum atom and NPN reiteration: Quantum atom composed by NP and NPN reiteration: Thanks to the principle of reiteration, the probability of finding after NP and NPN in the atomic nuclei is consequent. Which brings us, and in relation to the atomic signature, to the conclusion of a composition rich in Deuterium, Tritium and Helium 4-5-6 The atomic signature corresponds to the spacing of the lines according to the energy delivered from the particle. The smaller the energy in ev, the greater the spacing of the line. The absence of line indicates that there is no particle in the field to study. Each line represents the path to the singularity that could be responsible for the electrical charges generated.
  12. I know I was wrong. Because C is different of √C. So if v²=C when x=0 then √C also gives the root for x is √x I only know f(x) and I understand for the time being the infinitesimal interval of dx/dt. I have not yet understood v0. Maybe you would have a link that explains it?
  13. Beginner. I really do not know. v0 = √C = x at zero = maximum velocity The constant (v0)2 is the maximum Velocity squared? The value metre per second? Now I'm seeing for the Leibniz's notation.
  14. Yes it's really logical. But I'm wondering why you tell me so, because it takes me to the Schrödinger equation or maybe even Maxwell. Is there a report? Everything is therefore based on v as a function of x. But I have a very silly question: If (v0)² is different from v² then what is the result of (v0)² if v=2 ?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.