Pivot

Looks as if the original uploaded file has been removed (possibly too long @ 61 pages?). Here is a direct link to download the pdf Sorry about that: all looked fine after the original post.

The STEM approach has been extended and re-tweaked to eliminate some mis-statements (but there are probably many still lurking). A summary of the STEM approach is: STEM proposes a tentative model for the structure of up and down quarks in terms of concentrated energy tori (referred to as CESs or preons), which may or may not need to be modified or replaced further down the track. However, in its current form, this quark structure has led to a structured atomic nucleus that is reflected by the characteristics of element types, and to new consistent explanations for a wide range of topics such as atomic bonding, electromagnetic fields, electricity, light and even Gravity. SDG has adopted a pragmatic approach to developing STEM. STEM is thus a physical model that has been developed with the specific aim of providing feasible explanations for Science-based observations and experiments, and it will ultimately be judged by how well it can explain about the world around and within us. So, let’s summarise what observations and phenomena for which STEM can provide feasible explanations. STEM provides explanations related to the following topics: 1. Nucleon-type conversion (i.e. of neutron ↔ proton conversion), which leads to an explanation of electron capture and beta decay, and their associated by-products (beta radiation and neutrinos). 2. Carbon-12. Provides two different nucleus structures for carbon-12 that explains the different physical characteristics of the allotropic forms of graphite (and graphene) and diamond. 3. Detailed true-to-scale models form many atoms. Detailed models provided up to silicon-28, and then for copper, silver and gold; also for important molecules such as hydrogen (both para and ortho forms), and water (including feasible explanations for the bend and stretch of steam molecules and for the hexagonal form of ice crystals). 4. The different polygonal patterns apparent in hydrocarbons. 5. The Coulomb barrier and redox reactions (including those appropriate to galvanic and electrolytic cells). 6. Gravity: an explanation based upon enerspheres that which applies at both the cosmological macro scale and the micro level for objects on Earth. It is conceptually far simpler than the abstract mathematical models involving the warping of space-time. 7. Electric fields. They are considered to be derived from fundamental particles (e.g. electrons and CESs) and to consist of field-energy that has a circular or vortex-like flow pattern. Electric charge polarity (i.e. negative versus positive) is considered to be determined by the chirality of the field-energy. 8. Charge carriers: negative and positive charge carriers have the same characteristics as electrons, but have different field-energy chirality. A metal conductor contains an equal number of positive and negative charge carriers that are loosely bound to atoms as ionic orbital electrons. 9. Magnetic fields: their field-energy has a linear (but not necessarily straight) flow pattern from an energy source (a north pole) to an energy sink (a south pole). The close relationship between electric and magnetic fields, as encapsulated by the term ‘electromagnetic’, occurs because they both consist of the same type of field-energy, but simply with different flow patterns. 10. Electric currents: defined as the movement of electron-like negative and positive charge carriers in the opposite direction under the influence of an applied or induced emf. 11. Battery power sources: Galvanic and Electrolytic cells. 12. Electromagnetic induction; electromagnetic (motor) force. 13. Eddy currents and the Hall Effect 14. Static electricity (electrostatic charge). 15. Capacitors and inductors. 16. Light (photonic EMR). A feasible explanation for the apparent wave-particle duality of light in terms of Field-Energy Rings (FERs), and for the polarisation effects due to light refraction and reflection. Provides a simple explanation of why a π/2 phase difference between a pair of merged orthogonal PPL rays presents as a LH circular polarised light (CPL), and when the a phase difference is 3*π/2 RH CPL results. It also provides quite a detailed explanation of the formation of optic vortex light (OVL). 17. Micro and radio waves (non-photonic EMR). 18. Semiconductors: P-N junctions (diodes), photovoltaic cells, photodiodes and LEDs. 19. NPN and PNP transistor operation. The attached pdf file is a reasonably detailed overview of the STEM approach, and it makes reference to the STEM Development Group's three position papers that can be downloaded for more detail if required. I look forward to discussing STEM in more detail. 689789353_STEMOverviewExtended.pdf

Wot an energenic geriatric.

The orbital electron is possibly simply an unfortunate historical aberration stemming from the 1913 Bohr model of a positively charged nucleus holding negatively charged electrons in orbit. The comforting features of the Bohr model, particularly in the early 1900’s, were its simplicity and similarity to our own planetary system, with a Sun being the equivalent of a nucleus and the orbiting planets the electrons. The main difference, apart from size and scale, is that the planets are held in orbits by gravitational pull whereas electrons are allegedly by opposite electric charge attraction; and there is the slight problem that the mutual repulsion between protons within the nucleus should cause it to explode, which is usually conveniently forgotten or not actively pursued. Discrepancies between predicted and measured energy levels related to emission and adsorption spectra soon became problematic, resulting in the Bohr model being upgraded to the Orbital Nuclear Atomic Model (ONAM). For ONAM, the nucleus is represented as a cluster of nucleons (positively charged protons and neutral neutrons arranged in no specific order or structure); the orbital electrons are considered to act more like electromagnetic waves than as particles; and the shell-like spherical orbitals have been replaced by the weirdly shaped ‘spdf’ probability distributions as determined by the wave equations. However, despite increased sophistication and complexity, the planetary system analogy still persists, as does the concept that wave-like electrons are still held within orbital clusters by the electric field attraction by protons within the nucleus. The first time that I came across a theory suggesting that electrons do not orbit around an atomic nucleus was the 2003 online version of Professor P M Kanarev’s 'The Foundations of Physchemistry of Micro World'. Although Kanarev’s experiment results and associated mathematical modelling seemed to be quite thorough, because at that particular time I was a firm believer in the ONAM approach, I was most skeptical about his claims and did not pursue them. Around 2016 work began on the energy-centric hypothesis that there is only one type of energy generating material (dubbed energen), initially focussing upon the electron. Electrons are considered to be a fundamental (or elementary) particle, and because fundamental particles would seem to be associated with angular momentum, and thus have a spin component (albeit intrinsic), it seemed likely that energen in a concentrated form would also have a circular flow or spin. Research indicated that the most appropriate physical model for an electron was a variation of the toroidal model, which in turn led to the Spin Torus Energy Model (STEM). Further down the track, when looking at the implications of the energen-based approach to atom structure, the toroidal electron structure also seemed appropriate for the preon (the fundamental particle that underpins the structure of quarks). The STEM version of the preon thus became the concentrated energy source (CES), which is considered to have a similar structure to that of an electron, but is larger and contains much more energen that is more concentrated. The STEM CESs are considered to build into up and down quarks; the quarks built into nucleons; and nucleons into an atomic nuclei that, amazingly, well match the physical characteristics and preferred bonding orientations of the elements of the Periodic table without the need for orbital electrons. Although, with the STEM approach, orbital electrons are not required, that is not to say that electrons do exist within an atom’s structure but, when they do, they are in a pre-electron form called a bitron. Free electrons within matter are considered to have been generated from bitrons within chemical bonds when the bonds are damaged or broken, and from bitrons within particular nuclei via a fission process. Thus free electrons are considered to be a derived and renewable resource, which in part explains why they are so plentiful and readily available, particularly within highly conductive material such as metals. The development of STEM has been iterative and, along the way, many fairly major mistakes have been made and blind alleys followed. In its current form, STEM is a physical model that remains far from being complete, and probably even further away from being fully correct: but it does represent the start of a new approach that is, hopefully, heading in the right direction to add to future Physics. As well as a paper discussing atomic structure, `STEM provides one about the structure of the electron, electromagnetic fields and electricity; and another addressing the nature of EMR and the various forms of light, all readily and freely available for your perusal.