IUBio

My work in Physics

Kenneth 'pawl' Collins k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net
Sun Jan 5 01:01:00 EST 2003


I've discussed it in the past, but I want to add it here so that
it'll be grouped with the rest of the discussion.

=All= of the evidence that's been held to 'substantiate' the
existence of so-called 'quarks' also reduces directly to the
continuously-varying spherical Geometry SSW<->UES
compression-expansion harmonics.

When folks probe what've been referred to as 'nuculear' constituent
'particles', what they're actually doing is delivering incoming
energy into the SSW<->UES harmonics, and the interpretation of there
being "three quarks" in, say, a 'proton', is 'just' the result of the
fact [in Tapered Harmony] that, since the SSW<->UES harmonics
['atoms'] are undergoing continuous compression and expansion,
there're periodic limits within which probing energy can interact
with the relatively 'nucleated' 'portion' of the
compression-expansion harmonics. Outside of those limits, probing
energy will just not interact with the energy 'contained' in an
SSW<->UES harmonic in a way that's correlated with what's been
referred to as the [so-called] 'strong nuclear force'.

The relatively 'nucleated' 'portion' of the SSW<->UES harmonics
'winks' in and out of it's energy-density existence, and any energy
probes that are to interact in-there must 'fit between' when the
relatively 'nucleated' 'portion' of the SSW<->UES harmonics
'winks'-in and 'winks'-out. At currently accessible accelerator
energies, this means that only three energy probes can 'fit' in-there
before the 'nucleated' energy expancs, heading toward its 'shelling'
limit.

There exist no such things as "quarks".

And, because there exist no 'quarks', there's no need to search for
'sub-particles' of the non-existent 'quarks'.

What there =is= a need to do is gently-elegant experiments which
probe the SSW<->UES harmonics in Geometrically-compound ways.

There's an Awesome-Big future for Physics with respect to such
Geometrically-compound stuff, the vast majority of which can be
achieved at relatively-low [relative to 'superconducting-colider'
setups] energy levels, This's not to say that such experimentation
will be a 'cake-walk'. At least at first, it will not. This's because
all of the experimental design must be tuneable at the 'level' of the
SSW<->UES harmonics themselves. The just-getting-started approach
that presently seems promising to me is one which is somewhat
analogous to so-called "laser cooling" apparatuses, in which the
emphasis is on spherical 'symmetry', but with variations that're
tunable with respect to the spherical Geometry of the SSW<->UES
harmonics. It's not necessary to use high energies because low
energyie can be delivered in myriad ways in which they add and
subtract with respect to this or that 'portion' of an SSW<->UES
harmonic's compression-expansion periodicity.


All sorts of new technological usefulnesses will come out of this
sort of approach to doing Physics.

K. P. Collins

Kenneth 'pawl' Collins wrote in message ...
|Sorry - got to fix a couple of typos, and I've added an additional
|comment, below.
|
|Kenneth 'pawl' Collins wrote in message
|<0OGR9.94932$hK4.7701936 at bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>...
||Further clarification below:
||
||Kenneth 'pawl' Collins wrote in message
||<4TxR9.94292$hK4.7647070 at bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>...
|||Whoops!
|||
|||"Pauli 'exclusion' is in-there be-cause the energy-density
||variations
|||within the spherical Geometry are never the same at any 'point'
|||within the compression-expansion harmonics"
|||
|||Except, of course, with respect to [non-physically-real idealized
|||case] 'spherical symmetry'.
|||
|||Sorry about the typos. I've fixed them below.
|||
|||ken
|||
|||Kenneth 'pawl' Collins wrote in message ...
||||Can you see it?
||||
||||The energy 'contained' within an SSW<->UES harmonic [within an
|||"atom"], is not just undergoing periodic compression and
expansion.
|||It's also undergoing density variations, all continuously.
||||
||||This means that, at the compression and expansion limits,
there're
|||spherical-geometrical 3-D energy "index of refraction" variations.
||||
||||And when incoming energy meets these energy-density-deriving
|||'indes[x]  o[f] refraction' variations, the energy's traverse is
|||altered in accord with the energy-density variations.
||||
||||Only the energy-density variations are [themselves]
=continuously=
|||varying.
||||
||||It makes for extremely-rich, and extraordinarily-useful,
|||energy-interaction possibilities [w]hich Physics has not yet even
|||begun to explore [outside of Tapered Harmony].
||
||
||For instance, in accelerator collisions, the fanning-out of
|so-called
||'particles' of supposedly all the 'same' type [so-called 'pions',
|for
||instance] rigorously reflects the continuously-varying 'atomic'
||energy-density "index of refraction" as the SSW<->UES harmonics
||proceed in their periodicity until the energy imparted in the
||collision becomes sufficient to 'disrupt' the harmonics -then what
||was 'instnataneously-prior' an SSW<->UES harmonic, 'just' breaks
||apart, sending the energy that was 'contained' within it back into
||the energy-surround.
||
||
||The important thig to grasp, here, is the rigorous correlation
||between the observed fanning-out of the detritus of the impending
||breaking-apart of the SSW<->UES harmonic and the
|continuously-varying
||energy-density 'atomic' 'index of refraction'.
||
||It's Beautifully-exact - no so called 'uncertainty', and, in it,
the
||spherical Geometry of the SSW<->UES harmonics can be read exactly.
||
||The result is a spherical-Geometry instance of the planar instance
||that Newton would've observed, if, somehow, his prisim were to
||continuously diminish in height as he opserved its refraction
||traces - the the same-color [visible EM spectrum] traces would
||fan-out, like multi-colored
||searchlights being driven in a particular synchrony with respect to
||each other - the effect would be particularly-beautiful.
|
|Additional comment: And, of course, this 'fanning-out' phenomenon
has
|it's expansion-phase correlate, only that's be fanning-in -the 2-D
|analogue of which would be Newton's prisim, somehow,
|continuously-iincreasing in height as he observed it's
|visible-spectrum EM traces.
|
|This sort of thing, of course, explains the observations that hold
|that 'particle' types "come in pairs", - why there's not-so-"fearful
|'symmetry`" in-there.
|
|That's all for this update.
|
|ken [K. P. Collins]
|
||And, it is Beautiful - in the traces of same-type 'particles
that're
||observable in accelerator collisions - reducing entirely, and
||exactly, to the continuously-[v]arying energy density of the
|SS[W]<->UES
||harmonics - the continuously-varying 'atomic' 'index of refraction.
||
||That's all for this update.
||
||K. P. Collins
||
||||
||||To get a handle on it, think of being under 'interogation' by
some
|||'police' organization's officials.
||||
||||You're sitting there listening to the guestioning of the fellow
|||directly in front of you, and the fellow 90 degrees to your left
|||starts simultaneously questioning you - it's a compound
energy-flow
|||with which you must deal - you are the incoming energy - feel the
|||path you'll follow as you experience the compound energy-flow that
|||the questioning constitutes.
||||
||||You know, just make yourself small and be the energy. See the
|||peripheral "shelling" and [central] "nucleating" energy-density
|||variations waxing and waining, and imagine the way your path would
||be
|||'morphed' in accord with those energy-density variations, which is
|||all just simple refraction within a spherical, periodicly-varying
|||Geometry [with the aditional compounding of motion vectors that
|||derives in the energy-density variations]
||||
||||Or think about skateboarders practicing their techniques in a
|||well-done skateboard park. The paths they follow would be
partially
|||analogous to the paths the incoming energy follows within an
|||SSW<->UES harmonic if the curvature of the ramps were not static.
||||
||||Like I said, the energydynamics are 'violent' - not in any
|||'negative' way, but in the extreme conditions they impose during
|||energy interactions.
||||
||||It's all very straight-forward once one 'goes for a walk' within
||the
|||dynamic spherical Geometry. I mean, everything in-there is
||rigorously
|||predictable - no so-called 'uncertainty', no so-called
|||'position\momentum' problem be-cause there exist no 'particles
|||in-there.
||||
||||Pauli 'exclusion' is in-there be-cause the energy-density
||variations
|||within the spherical Geometry are never the same at any 'point'
|||within the compression-expansion harmonics [except, of course,
with
|||respect to [non-physically-real idealized case] 'spherical
|||symmetry'.] - so there's the appearance [illusion] of their being
|||'exclusivity' with respect to '[discrete] energy levels' - but
|there
|||exist no such discrete energy levels or 'electron orbit[s] [there
|||[exist] no 'electrons'[ within physical reality]]. All there is is
|||the |continuously-varying energy density. With respect to such,
|||there're only certain[...] 'portions' of the continuous
|||energy-density variation with respect to which incoming energy,
|||having particular frequency, can interact, anything below that
||energy
|||density, and the incoming energy just passes-through - unless the
|||energy density variation catches-up before the incoming energy
|||crosses the width of the 'atom'.
||||
||||It goes on and on like this, incorporating the stuff of all known
|||experimental results. [Challenges welcome.] Only, the SWS, SSW,
UES
|||view reduces everything to much-simpler form, while giving up
||nothing
|||of traditional explanatory power, and gaining much.that the
|||traditional approach to 'atomic' structure just couldn't see.
||||
||||And it eliminates the 'epicycles' [non-physically-real
'particles]
|||to boot.
||||
||||What's not to like?
||||
||||"That =you= did it, Ken"
||||
||||"Oh well" :-]
||||
||||K. P. Collins
||||
||||Kenneth 'pawl' Collins wrote in message
||||<5ruR9.94133$hK4.7624206 at bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>...
|||||clarification below.
|||||
|||||Kenneth 'pawl' Collins wrote in message ...
||||||Anyway, re. "how every so-called [Sorry] 'particle' gains its
||||||observable qualities - even while it remains continuous with
all
||||||other energy":
||||||
||||||It all derives in Tapered Harmony's reconceptualization of
|||||what've
||||||been referred to as "atoms" as spherical standing waves that're
|||||in
||||||harmonic compression-expansion interaction with a continuous
||||||surrounding energy supply - SSW<->UES harmonics.
||||||
||||||This's what's schematically represented in all the QBasic apps
I
||||||posted in the recent past, and I presume folks who are
|interested
||||||in testing what I'll discuss here will've saved one or more
||||||versions of those apps.
||||||
||||||The crucial thing, with respect to the topic of this msg [the
||||||"newer" stuff that I referred to in the post[s] to which this
|msg
||||||is in reply] is that, as the SSW<->UES harmonics continuously
||||||unfold, the energy densities of both the 'nucleating' [central]
||||||'portion of the SSW and the peripheral 'shelling' 'portion' of
|||||the
||||||SSW, undergo cyclical variation.
||||||
||||||Incoming energy [in the form of spherical wave shells [SWS],
||||||having various magnitude, will interact with the energy
|'trapped'
||||||in the 'nucleating' and/or 'shelling' 'portions of the
SSW<->UES
||||||harmonic in rigorous accord with the 'instantaneous' energy
||||||gradients in 'nuc' and 'shell', which is, of course, rigorously
||||||subhect to the continuously-varying spherical Geometry of the
||||||SSW<->UES harmonic.
||||||
||||||What this means is that the incoming SWS will 'see' 'shell' and
||||||'nuc' energy gradients which are, themselves, continuously
|||||varying
||||||with the SSW Geometry, and be-cause the SWS is, itself, a
||||||compression-expansion harmonic, there is a rigorous periodicity
|||||to
||||||the energy interaction dynamics.
||||||
||||||In the case of SWS interaction with the SWS while it's energy
||||||density is 'shell'-dominant, the curvature of the SSW is
||||||relatively 'gentle, and and so is the energy distribution
within
||||||the relatively large 'shell', so all the SWS<->SSW interactions
||||||that'll occur will reflect commensurate energy transitions and
||||||directionality refractions - the observables  will be feferred
|to
||||||as pertaining to "leptons", and correlated to the so-called
|'weak
||||||interaction.
||||||
||||||The same is True with respect to SWS<->SSW interactions during
|||||the
||||||'nucleation'-dominant 'portion' of the SSW<->UES harmonics,
|only,
||||||be-cause the energy densities are relatively greater during
||||||'nucleation', and be-cause the 'nucleating' curvature tends
|||||toward
||||||relative extremes, resultant energy transitions and
|||||directionality
||||||changes will both tend to be relatively greater than is in the
||||||case with respect to SSW 'shelling' dynamics - the observable
|||||will
||||||be referred to as pertaining to "hadrons", and correlated to
the
||||||so-called 'strong interaction'
||||||
||||||What's been referred to as "antimatter" is not some sort of
||||||'contray' form of energy 'compartmentalization', but, rather is
||||||'just' the result of their being two phases in the SSW<->UES
||||||harmonics. During compression, the incoming SWS 'sees' a
||||||continuously 'shrinking' spherical Geometry, but during
|expansion
||||||the incoming SWS 'sees' a continuously 'growing' spherical
||||||Geometry.
||||||
||||||The 'difference' between 'matter' and 'anti-matter' is 100%
||||||reducible to these two energy-density-variation Geometries,
|which
||||||are both spherically convex with respect to the incoming SWS,
|but
||||||are exact inverses with respect to 'instantaneous' SWS
|||||energy-flow
||||||directionality.
||||||
||||||The last thing is what results in what's been referred to as
||||||"antimatter" having the 'appearance' of it's being 'the
|opposite'
||||||of what's been referred to as "matter".
|||||
|||||"Matter" and "antimatter" "anihilate" each other when they meet
|||||be-cause they embody the inverse Geometries in which they were
|||||created. When they meet, their inverse Geometries 'un-do' each
|||||other, and the energy that was 'contained' within them, having
|||||lost it's 'containment' Geometry just flows freely back into the
|||||UES. It's the same thing that would happen on the macroscopic
|||||scale if, say, a two-compartment cylinder, top-half filled with
|||||liquid stuff that's been sent spinning in one direction, bottom
|||||half filled with liquid stuff that's been set spinning in the
|||||opposite direction - then the barrier between the two bodies of
|||||oppositely-spinning fluids is removed, allowing the fluids to
|||||mix - when they mix, they'll 'slowly' 'anihilate' their opposite
|||||spinning-ness, giving off heat - leaving a quieted body of
fluid.
|||||
||||||All of what's been considered to constitute evidence
||||||substantiating the existence of so-called [Sorry] "discrete
||||||particles" derives in the facts of the continuous variations of
||||||both the SWS and SSW Geometries.
||||||
||||||I wanted to do an app that presented all of this schematically,
|||||to
||||||help folks see it, but I've no 'time' during which to write the
||||||code, so folks'll have to put their thinking caps on and
|||||construct
||||||the imagery in their own good minds.
||||||
||||||All of the SWS<->SSW interaction dynamics [energy-exchange
||||||dynamics] are analogous to what would be a particularly-violent
||||||version of an "egg-beater" ty[p]e of amusement park thrill
ride.
||||||Imagine yourself as first the energy of the 'portion' of the
SWS
||||||that interacts with the SSW, and then as the energy of the
||||||'portion' of the SSW that interacts with the SWS, and 'go for a
||||||ride' on this 'egg beater' thing.
||||||
||||||In this extreme version of the "egg beater", the 'rider' [the
||||||energy] experiences not only the force of transition from
||||||peripheral Geometry to central Geometry, but, also, the whole
||||||Geometry's expansion and compression.
||||||
||||||All of the observable qualities of the so-called "discrete
||||||particles" derive in this extreme spherical-Geometry variation.
|||||
|||||
|||||Here, the various magnitudes of correlated energy derive in the
|||||Geometrical 'violence' of that 'portion' of the SSW<->UES
|||||harmonics phase during which the interaction occurs. If it
occurs
|||||during 'shelling', the harmonics of the incoming energy has to
|fit
|||||into that portion of the SSW<->UES harmonic's dynamics, or the
|||||incoming energy will just pass-through relatively unobservable -
|||||stuff like the photoelectric cutoff frequency derives in thes
|||||phase -matching frequency correlations.
|||||
|||||The analogous stuff also applies to the 'nucleation' 'portion'
of
|||||the SSW<->UES harmonics, except that be-cause the 'nucleation'
|||||energy is relatively 'condensed', there's a relatively-broader
|||||range of possible frequencies for the incoming energy. That is,
|||||incoming energy can interact with the 'nucleating' 'portion' of
|||||the SSW even when the 'nucleation' is non-maximal be-cause the
|||||energy density is commensurate with the frequency of the
incoming
|||||energy.
|||||
|||||Throughout all of these dynamics, the incoming energy can
|interact
|||||with the SSW-bound energy only while their phases are
|sufficiently
|||||correlated. Hence the appearance of energy's being 'quantized'.
|||||
|||||Energy is =not= quantized. =Energy-exchange= [energy
|||||transformation] dynamics are 'quantized' be-cause of the
dynamics
|||||of the phase-matching as discussed above.
|||||
|||||It's like if there were a continuously-rotating lunch-time
|||||automate machine. One is standing there continuously, but one
can
|||||only get 'chocolate-cream pie' once every rotation of the
device.
|||||
|||||It's the same with energy-exchange dynamics, except it's that
the
|||||frequency-matching must be in-there for the analogue of 'getting
|||||the chocolate-pie' to happen.
|||||
|||||All of this is 'just' in the spherical Geometry of the SSW<->UES
|||||and SWS<->UES compression-expansion harmonics.
|||||
|||||All the interaction possibilities derive in the
|||||continuously-varying spherical Geometry and the energy-density
|||||variations that accompany the geometrical variation.
|||||
|||||That's all for this clarifying update. ken
|||||
||||||What've been referred to as "spin" and "angular momentum" fall
||||||right out of the during-interaction spherical Geometry be-cause
|||||of
||||||the energydynamics of both the SWS and SWS
compression-expansion
||||||periodisities.
||||||
||||||What's been referred to as "magnetic moment" requires doing all
||||||this with two or more SSW<->UES harmonics, which I'll leave for
||||||later, after folks've had a chance to grasp what's here.
||||||
||||||The crucial thing is that the energy density that an SSW<->UES
||||||harmonic presents to any incoming SWS harmonic varies
||||||continuously, and for instance, the paths taken by the detritus
|||||of
||||||collisions in 'particle' accelerators 100% reduces to these
||||||interactive energy-density variations.
||||||
||||||The SSW<->UES harmonics are so variationally-'violent' that the
||||||Geometry of the incoming SWS gets 'morphed' from one 'instant'
|to
||||||the next - in much the same fashion in which Cosmologists've
||||||imagined matter being morphed and ripped apart as it
transitions
||||||across the event horizons of so-called "black holes" - as the
||||||energy density that the SSW presents to the SWS continuously
||||||varies. This creates, for idealized instance, 'comma'-like
|energy
||||||distributions which have intrinsic angular momenta as they're
||||||flung  out of the collicion focus. Put such in a magnetic
field,
||||||and the detritus follows a stereotypical path that rigorously
||||||correlates with the way it was geometrically morphed during its
||||||interaction with the SSW<->UES harmonic Geometry.
||||||
||||||The view that's presented here will, of course, become
||||||considerably refined as it's hammered on by Mathematicians, but
||||||it's fundamentals will stand, relatively unchanged, for all of
||||||'time' - because they are rigorously defined at all scales in
||||||what's presented here.
||||||
||||||Anyway, there's an exceedingly-rich 'new world' in what's here.
||||||I've already been able to show, for instance, how to derive
|||||energy
||||||in ways that'd not yet been conceived.
||||||
||||||So, what's here will open the "door" to Humanity's Future.
||||||
||||||I'll discuss further in the coming days [as what's left of me
||||||allows - it's 'hilarious' - my personal experience is not
unlike
||||||the experience of the SWS as it encounters the "egg beater"
|stuff
||||||of an SSW<->UES harmonic - the main thing is that what I can
See
||||||is just 'exploding' in magnitude - yet I've only these few days
||||||left(?) - where do I begin to describe the 'explosion's worthy
||||||stuff?
||||||
||||||Anyway, anyway, anyway...
||||||
||||||K. P. Collins
||||||
||||||[I'll Love by sparing Love the travail.]
||||
||||
|||
|||
||
||
|
|





More information about the Neur-sci mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net