sci.physics.particle

On Mar 27, 11:53=A0am, "Y.Porat" wrote:
> On Mar 27, 10:19=A0am, Kumar wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 27, 12:31=A0pm, "Y.Porat" wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 27, 5:45=A0am, Kumar wrote:
>
> > > > On Mar 26, 12:14=A0pm, "Y.Porat" wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Can we just related four forces mediating these nature's law/
> > > > > > initiations. I think, gravity may be relevant to "nature balance=
s
> > > > > > itself". :)
> > > > A
> > > > > ---------------
> > > > > 'see the 'chain of orbitals' ides
>
> > > > > Y.Porat
> > > > > -------------------------------- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > Pls tell me more about it.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > ----------------
> > > anyone who saw my model
> > > saw it graphycally and symbolically
> > > anyway
> > > i can try and describe it by afew words:
>
> > > the thesis is that
> > > orbitals as known now are sort of closed curves
> > > now my innovative idea is that
> > > those orbitals are not just separated single entities
> > > but can as well combine to a
> > > ;Chain of orbitals' !!
> > > if you like some simlistic methaphore:
> > > like the human =A0 invented chain of say links
> > > waht is special in that chain ?? a few things
> > > 1
> > > since we agree that any orbital is something dymanic
> > > somethings that move in that curved criture-
> > > nothin can interfere in its path or else it will collide and
> > > be distroyed mutually
> > > so
> > > if liks 'whants to combine'
> > > they must live inpeace witheachother
> > > ie not to interfere one with the path of the other
> > > the simplest arangment that one can thing
> > > ios that those links are connected one inside the other
> > > *inj a diffrent plan**(similar to =A0the uman =A0invented chain is )
>
> > > now comes another forwards step =A0revolutionary suggestion
> > > that actually is inevitable by my findings about the
> > > atom and nuc structre :
>
> > > *it is not only that the orbitals *of the same order* can link
>
> > > EVEN ORBITALS OF DIFFERENT ORDERS- CAN LINK !!
>
> > > =A0so back to practice:
> > > lets take an example
> > > if the electyron is an orbital
> > > and a nuclear particle is anorbital as well
> > > they can link as i described above to
> > > =A0A CHAIN OF ORBITALS !!
>
> > > =A0sop waht is the innovation here??
>
> > > the nuclear orbital is not controlling the electron orbital
> > > by sort of a mysterious remote control but ...
> > > by immediate thouch and connection =A0between them !!
> > > and btw
> > > it explaines nicely the facts known
> > > that strong forces are becoming stronger while some
> > > strech is done on the chain
> > > but is the chain is overcome and breaks
> > > the stron force imediately and suddenly disapear!!
> > > (like the human chain
> > > it has some freedom of movemen along some distance
> > > but if you strech it very hard it beraks suddeny
> > > iow
> > > it explained the stron force as very strong but....
> > > only a very short range !!
> > > beyond that range it ' suddenly does not exist'
> > > 2
> > > i found in my reasurch
> > > that there is not only a nuclear strong force connected to the
> > > electron
> > > but
> > > there is some MEDIATING UKNOWN =A0ORBITAL
> > > =A0that i called the medium orbitalt that makes it 3 links
> > > 3
> > > no that idea goes evenfurther
> > > i suggest and guess that even the neutrino
> > > is another link on that chain of orbitals
> > > 4
> > > oh yes i forgot to say that the =A0links of the orbitals on the chain
> > > become bigger in range but smaller in mass
> > > as they are located furtheraway =A0from the base strong orbilal
>
> > > so how do you like that new(revolutionary =A0idea ??
>
> > > TIA
> > > Y.Porat
> > > ------------------------ Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > and do you mean, that medium orbital is gravitational force?- Hide quote=
d text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> -----------------
> no but thank you for your question
> i forgit to note it may be because i wahted to be short
> so =A0please listen caerully because it is immensly interesting:
>
> the =A0what i called medium orbitals
> are not just one but **3 of them** in a subchain
> they are not only abstract =A0orbitals ]
> i found exacly ther mass !!
> by bingind energy losses !!
>
> each of them is 0.00125 =A0AMU
> and there are 3 !! of them =A0all thogether
> 0.00375 AMU
>
> does the number 3 reminds you of something ??
> if not
> the 0.00375 amu
> is about the mass of the ..... Quark !!!
>
> so the magic figure =A03 =A0 =A0that i discovered as building
> binding energies
> fits =A0 accidentally (i di dnt think about it while discovering it)
> so its fits the 3 quark theory and experimentally founf mass
> of quarks...
> now you understand why i am so angree
> while people say that the proton of neutron is composed of
> 3 quarks mysterious 'glueone' (that fill' the 90 percent mass
> missing)and 'fullo stop !!
> =A0pretending as if they know completely the structre of the nucleid !!
>
> ATB
> Y.Porat
> ------------------------- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

ps
and i have to add that
Chemists should understand my 'Chain of orbitals[' idea
because :....
all chemisty compound are --
**one big .. 'chain of orbitals ' !!!
only that my important innovation in physics is
that even chains and links of DIFFERENT ORDERS

can combine to a chain of orbitals

ATB
Y.Porat
---------------------------------------