sci.physics.particle

On Mar 28, 6:24=A0am, Kumar wrote:
> On Mar 27, 2:53=A0pm, "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 balan=
ces
> > > > > > > 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 chai=
n
> > > > 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 quo=
ted 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 -
>
> Intresting but bit more technical for me. Does it not suggest that all
> fundamental forces are related to each other?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

----------------
yes!
i dont have a direct phone to God (:-)

all i cantell you is my private understandings and guesses
yet i think i have some long period of folowing scinece
and even my private investigations and findings
after a long resarch project about the structure of matter
that lasted many years
so
yess
i guess that actually all forces arer based on the same simple 'trick'
that is why i suggest the 'Circlon' idea :
a basic particle that
*moved **naturally* in a curved path !!
that idea should replace the 'curved space time' idea !!
(excuse the arrogance ...)
matter spreading nonstop a sort of a fountain
of circlons
they are epread out but come back because of the
corved nature of theit movement
and that is btw who attraction force doe snot get lost !!!
if it was done by something that moves in straight lines
it would ....... guess what??
most of them should be lost in case they miss the target
yet it does not happen ass an experimantal fact
now
if two masses are close and each of themis spreading its
fountain'
there is a situation in which those circlons
suround the other mass and hit it from its rare side @!
may be some of them from the front side
9the shortest line between the two masses)
but those at the front side ((cllide and canceleach other
from the opposite side
so we get
**an unballanced force * that pushes thmmasses
close to each other
and stronger an stronger as comming closer
because in that close distance
those 'fountains are thicker !!
how about that ??
2
another surprising idea"
if you folow my chain of orbital idea
THE CIRCLON' CAN EXPLAIN THAT CHAIN OF ORBITALS
ther very exostance and their beiavious
a closed 'fountan ' that conraines a big amput of circlons
canbahave like a sort of a solid ring !!!
and there you got the chain of orbitals that are
more massive at the base (mother orbital)
and getting looser and less massive as they get
firther away from that motrher orbital
(the bundle of mass that moves ina closed circle
i s more massive at themother particle aria (volume )
since allthe basic particles that make that structre
always comes back in a circular movement

another assumption abouth those corclons is that
a circlon wil keep it sradius of movement
untill and unless it colides with another one
(parallel to Newtons forst law of motion
but not in a straight line!)
anothe imjportant note :
a ring od circlons can move ijn a straight line
ie
if its center of gravity (of the ring) is moving in a stright line
or simpler:
thecenter of gravity of a ring orbital
CAN \move in straigh tlines
even though the movement** in the ring** is circular!! (:-)
so for a n observer from ousde it
each circlon there is doing a composit movement
how about that ??

TIA
Y.Porat
---------------