Jump to content


Senior Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Przemyslaw.Gruchala

  1. But what makes it an anti particle in the first place?


    Antimatter is created all the time and is everywhere.

    See proton + proton collision at 0.36c it'll produce pion 0, which is supposed to be made of up and anti-up, down and anti-down quarks,

    or pion- and pion+ which are also supposed to be made of up, anti-down, and down and anti-up quarks.


    We don't see antiprotons in our world, because they're quickly converted to photons as soon as they are colliding with regular protons in the atmosphere.

    Astronauts do see it- when they close eyes they don't see black, instead little flashes.

  2. Feynman? Schrodinger or Planck or Heisenberg aren't alive still are they? I would expect not, but I could have sworn that I saw a relatively recent full color high resolution video/interview with Feynman himself explaining something about electro-magnetism even though the wikipedia says 1988, like it said "Ferynman" as his title name just below him when he was talking, though the person himself never said his name. I suppose it could have been the title like maybe "Feynmann diagrams with eletro-magnetism" but it wasn't that long, I could have sworn it said "Richard Feynman", and he had grey hair and looked like this


    Conclusion- when you know the true answer what is Universe, you're becoming immortal.. biggrin.png


  3. Gravitation is essential part of the Universe. Organic evolution is not.

    The most of planets, or billion of billions to 1, have no life, But they all have gravitation.

    Even the smallest "grain of sand" in vacuum in the space will "feel it" and join with other surrounding barely visible grain of sands and forming bigger and bigger objects.


    Depends upon which string theory you're referring to



    Initial one, the one which is described by Leonard Susskind in his book The Cosmic Landscape: String Theory and the Illusion of Intelligent Design. He is saying on page ~290 about 9+1 dimensions needed. It's close to section describing his the first meeting with Murray Gell-Mann. I enjoyed reaction of Murray and his open mind.


    (not that I agree with and support this theory)

  5. There is just one p in proton or there is "sea of them"?

    The same question for neutron, and electron..


    Are you aware of that alone neutron will decay to proton, electron and anti-neutrino?


    n -> p + np' + nn' (or pp' I am not sure using your notation)


    And these additional "particles" will come from "nowhere" which makes complete no sense for people reading it.. ?

    (or at least for me, because I require that math matches on both sides of equation perfectly)


    What with conversion of f.e. positron and electron to photons during annihilation.. ?

    What is configuration of pp'nn' inside of photon.. ?


    Przemyslawe, I recommend you open an attachment, where is the whole third part in the original colored and more structured form. .


    I don't have anything that read doc.
    I am reading only html/pdf for security reasons.
    Your English doesn't help either.
    And I thought that mine is bad.
    I have one question, which came up immediately after seeing this theory- what it has to do with Socrates??


    ........................................................................................n u k l e o n s
    .............................................proton ............... …………antiproton…… ........ neutron ……..............antineutron
    ................................................(p) …………........................(p‘) ………..............(n)…………..................(n‘)
    ........................................................................................ l e p t o n s(e)
    ........................................ .. positron........................ elektron..................... .. neutrinoP................... neutrino N
    .............................................. (pn‘)............................ (np‘)............................. (pp‘)............................. (nn‘)



    Am I correctly reading that you claim that positron (pn') is made of proton (p) and anti-neutron (n')?

    And electron is made of neutron and anti-proton?

  7. Two the most common elements in the Universe are Hydrogen and Helium.


    rand() function is using currently set srand().


    So, if you have 1 million star systems, create array, and initialize like this:


    srand( 0 );

    for( int i = 0; i < 1000000; i++ ) data[ i ] = rand();


    everytime data[ x ] will be the same value.


    Then use data[ x ] as argument to srand()


    srand( data[ x ] );


    it's some star system.


    Then use rand() with always the same order - randomize mass of star, randomize number of planets, their masses etc.


    It'll be all generated in fly just from index to data[] always looking the same.

    And you won't need large database to create and store on disk.

  8. You should not take TV shows as any kind of source. At best, they'll introduce you to ideas and start you thinking, but they are not to be cited as sources of any kind.


    So the same with any book, internet, and forums.


    Any single, even the most respectable, scientist can be wrong.

    Especially with things that can't be directly measured, but is indirectly, or couple levels indirectly interpreted.

  9. The simplest answer is: god is universe, and universe is god.

    After all current science theories merge matter and energy to one.


    Look to who ancients were praying:

    - to sun.. they knew that its energy means life. Confirmed by science.

    - to moon.. it's creating tides. It's important factor to create life. Frequently changing environment is good for variation of organisms. Steady environment means no/less variations. Organisms in caves couple hundred meters below ground didn't change a bit since Paleozoic or Mesozoic..

    - to Dzeus.. thunderbolt. it's known factor to create life. Some scientists recreated aminoacids just in a couple days in bottle with artificial thunderbolt with all required elements.


    Saying that "I am son of god" means "we are all child of god". When god = universe. We're child of universe.

    Also "joining with god" should be treated literally, when god = universe.


    So, you're upset with the scientific reporting? Not really sure how that is science's fault. The publishers of Scientific American need to make money. If stories about parallel worlds makes that money, then that is what they are going to publish.




    Every quantum physics book written by some Noble price winner that I had in mine hands is talking about parallel universes.. ;)


    Apparently US universities should pay them more..

  11. The key to understand Universe is way how two particles are colliding.


    If you have proton-proton and you collide them at low velocity, something neutral will pop up.

    Increase velocity, you have something positive and negative, such as pion- and pion+.

    Increase velocity, you have something positive and negative, such as additional proton and anti-proton.




    proton + proton = proton + proton + pion0

    proton + proton = proton + proton + pion- + pion+

    proton + proton = proton + neutron + pion+

    proton + proton = proton + proton + proton + anti-proton


    What is produced just depends on velocity of single initial proton (second one we can have at rest). The faster it moves the more is created.


    Analyse carefully this


  12. How should look like the real experiment testing whether photon has mass?



    So all these example have been a colossal waste of time as far as testing your proposal goes.


    Okay, then. You get no more of it from me.


    It was obvious for me for month that you didn't understand mine theory.. when you started asking about "where are 3 gamma photons from e- and e+ annihilation"..


    If (just IF, because we don't know it for sure) mass of elementary photon P 2/1 is m0=h*1/c^c=4.5952*10^-32

    then ratio between Proton with m0 = 938.272 MeV

    and above photon mass h/c^c is


    You don't want to manually count using such numbers, do you?


    Yes, but my model experiment concerns

    the actual electron standing alone in empty space. According to QED he

    should constantly emits virtuals photons.



    It would means that electron has infinite energy, if it in completely empty space, without adding it energy from outside, is constantly emitting photons..


    If we have electron and other electron, or electron or proton, and virtual photons are going from one to other, and then reverse, delta energy is 0. And it's logical. And energy is conserved.




    Przemyslawe, where wear electron these the additional particles?smile.png



    Proton, electron are bending space, so these photons are "orbiting" them - virtual photon would be going in straight path from it's point of view, but because spacetime is bended, they're rotating (from our point of view) around massive body. They would be very close to body they orbit.

    Now imagine that one body with such orbiting photons is hitting at low velocity with other body without photons orbiting (at rest) - part or all of these "virtual" photons are going from 1st body to 2nd body. How much goes depends on mass ratio between two bodies that collide.

  14. Showed low value example forumals are NOT our world particles.

    They teach reader how to calculate things and probably are lower energetic stages of future universe.


    I have theory that universe is evolving in energetic stages.


    Let's assume that fau- is "electron", then its equivalent of proton will be 1836,15 times more massive than tau-.

    Ratio is same as between our world proton/electron, so they behave exactly the same, except they're much more heavier.


    (it doesn't need to be the highest energetic stage, there can existing 4rd, 5th, etc. energetic stages, but they're all gone in current universe, or they're DM/DE)


    The same is with muon-, pion-, they should have it's proton-compatible particle 1836,15 heavier.


    In current universe, or close to our Sun, these high energy muon- and tau- and other 2nd, 3rd, generation particles are unstable.

    Or something causes them here to be unstable.

    This thing can be neutrinos from our Sun.

    But that's just mine intuition/thought.


    In other words: it's possible that on second side of universe we can see stars or even galaxies made of tau- and tau-compatible-proton particle. Ratio between them is same as in our world. They died a long time ago and quickly. And then went to lower energetic version muon- and muon-compatible-proton. Which also died and went to electron-proton energetic stage.


    I didn't add it to the main theory, because it's pure speculation.

    And quite hard to test- we would need to create devices disallowing our particles such as neutrino penetrating it, to see if muon- and tau- can survive longer.

    But if they're living just 10^-22...10^-13 or similar short period of time, how they could fly through whole universe in cosmic ray? It would mean that they're just created in atmosphere. NASA should test on orbit if muons-, pions-, tau- exist in cosmic rays, and find origin, to reject that they're created by Sun.

    If their origin is outer space, they must live longer, than fraction of second.




    When you want to calculate proper mass, proper energy and electric charge at the same time using mine formulas, there is needed to solve equation using general formula of particle:


    P N+N+3/N - it's proton-compatible particle

    P N+N-3/N - it's electron-compatible particle

    P N+N/N - it's neutral particle


    When you have f.e. collision of

    p+ + p+ -> p+ + p+ + pion0


    You should use equation


    P N+N+3/N + P M+M+3/M -> P O+O+3/O + P X+X+3/X + P Y+Y/Y


    If you would use N=M=O=X, it would mean that they're either are all at rest, or have equal momentum, or have equal temperature. You can't use N=M=O=X, because Y must be in N or M or both. N+M=O+X+Y


    But there is needed energy from outside to accelerate particle. That additional energy is equal to pion0 (or other neutral electric charge particle). Or little higher (later shows up as photons)


    P N+N+3/N + P N+N+3/N + X * P 2/1 -> P N+N+3/N + P N+N+3/N + P Y+Y/Y


    where N+N+3 is equivalent of rest mass of proton 938.272 MeV

    and Y+Y is equivalent of pion 0 rest mass 134.9766 MeV

    X - is number of photons needed to accelerate particle to produce pion0

    If X=Y particle would be at rest after collision, everything was taken by pion0.

    But we have no precise devices so always

    X>Y, and REST=X-Y particles are forming photons or are in momentum of newly created particles.


    If there is enough mass to form electron-, and positron+, they are created in collision.

    The same with higher mass unstable (here) particles.

    And at the end close to c (v>0.9c) there is enough to construct additional proton and anti-proton.


    Now you know from what is coming 1/2 in Ek = 1/2 * m * v^2...

    If we would multiply m by 2, then Ek=m*v^2 and in P.E have 2*m


    When you're talking about virtual photons in SM jumping between particles, it's equation:


    P T/N - x * P 2/1

    P T1/N1 + x * P 2/1

    Particle with higher energy is giving x photons to other particle. And slowing down/decreasing temperature. And other particle is accelerated/increased temperature.

  15. I have feeling that electron (at rest) that received photon, and not colliding with anything will be forever moving in the same direction.

    It's velocity will be constant to eternity (in completely empty space).


    Giving back photon (which is virtual in Standard Model, but true in mine), requires colliding with other particle (any kind).


    And relativistic mass is actually true mass, because these additional photons are still in particle.


    Analyze proton-proton collisions:



    Once they are producing photons, other time pions, in extreme producing proton and anti-proton.

    What is produced just depends on velocity of single (when second one is at rest), or both particles.

    To accelerate them there is needed energy = adding photons to particle.

    In our world (full of particles, increasing probability of collision) fast moving particle is giving back its additional photons, and slowing down.

  16. This model is an example a test of QED. Electron alone in the universe, according to QED, must incessant broadcasts virtual photons, even though he does not receive any



    Electrons, protons and other particles are all the time bombarded by photons and neutrinos sent by stars...


    In Universe there is never "alone" particle.

  • 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.