The energy of the proton

[jerrygg38]

Let us study the makeup of the proton from a simple Bohr model understanding of the atom. Modern physics have discounted the Bohr model due to several mistakes. The quantum physicists have done a great job of mathematically explaining the physics of the hydrogen atom using wave analysis. This provides excellent results from a mathematical viewpoint. It does not suffice to explain the physics involved. Thus it is good but inadequate.
In Doppler Space Time (Starway Scientific Press) 2000, I started the equations for the electron in the Bohr orbit. Unfortunately at that time I used the sister solution for the conversion of mass to charge M=QC. In the Dot wave theory I use M=Q. This means that mass is derived from electrical energy and thus kilograms and coulombs are the same units. Mass is not charge but the result of two charges which unite in a well to form a bipolar charge which has zero DC charge but which has a pulsating DC waveshape or is an AC charge.

First let us look at the Einsteinian orbital energy of the Bohr atom. The ionization energy is 13.58 electron volts. Let us calculate the increase of mass/energy of the electron in the first Bohr orbit. The electron is moving at C/137.
M = Mo / [1-(V/C)^2]^0.5 = 0.51101261
whereas the electron's rest mass = 0.510999MEV
The difference is 13.61 electron volts.
If we used c/137.036 we would get 13.606 electron volts.

Thus for the Bohr atom the ionization energy has the same value as the Einsteinian mass/energy change as per his formula.
To be continued

 

[jerrygg38]

Energy of the proton con't

Let us now look at the Einsteinian energy of the electron as it enters the proton to form the neutron.

The orbital equation for the electron in the Bohr orbit is

(V^2) / [1- (V/C)^2]^0.5 = K QQ / MeR (2-1)
Equation 2-1 is the standard force equation for the Bohr orbit with Einsteinian mass/energy corrections.
the radius of the proton is 1.3195698E-15

When the electron merges into the proton it will reach a speed according to equation 2-1. Without a computer program it is necessary to make a chart of value and solve the equation using successive approximations. Thus we test various values of V/C until we get a match.
In Doppler Space Time on page 48, the closest match to the equation occurs when V = 0.9186C. Anyone can make a chart themselves.
(Doppler Space time has only 1500 copies and were sent out to universities for free by myself) It is available used at Amazon.com. I am not a commercial enterprise and make no money by my books. In fact I have spent over $24,000 over the years giving away my books. It is my passion and my hobby.

The important thing is that most of the change in energy as we move from the electron & Proton to the Neutron is caused by the electrical field which brings about an Einsteinian mass increase.

Once we subtract out the Einsteinian mass increase, the neutrino has been reduced to

M(neutrino) = 1.293MEV -1.09122MEV = 0.20178MEV

Thus the neutron contains Einsteinian energy. This pressure causes it to self destruct into the proton and electron in free space.
To be continued

 

[jerrygg38]

Energy of proton con't

We see that the Einsteinian energy is very important and has been overlooked by quantum mechanics. Einstein did not agree with quantum mechanics and for good reason. The mathematical analysis of the universe does not tell us how it works.
I am an Electrical Engineer (70 years old this Dec). I build thing that work. My design for the SDC/GMP signal data converter/gun mount processor has been used on the Navy Aegis destroys for about 20 years. It worked the first time and every time.
The quantum mechanical theories produce excellent mathematical results but their failure to physically explain things negates the simplicity of the universe.
The Einsteinian orbital mass equation cannot be beat. I use Doppler Space Time for linear equations but Einsteins mass/energy formula is the best fit. In addition it tells us something. When photons are added to mass in an orbital situation, the mass of the object increases.

Let us now look at the u-meson shower. (I use my Polytechnic Brooklyn school textbooks which are quite old Allyn and Bacon printed June 1965 by Weidner Professor Rutgers and Sells Professor Oswego NY.
A high energy cosmic ray hits protons and neutrons the product is
Product = (-pi) + (-pi) + (+pi) + (+u)

the rest masses of the particles and Einsteinian masses at 0.9186C are
M (+pi) = M (-pi) = 273.23Me and 692.19Me
M(+u) = 206.84Me and 523.375Me

therefore we get 3 high energy u-mesons and one pi meson for every destruction of a proton or neutron.

Mass = 1570.13 + 273.23 = 1843.36Me

Therefore to within the accuracy of these calculations ( a computer could produce more accurate results), the binding energy of the proton is

BE = Proton - (3 high energy u-mesons) - (pi-meson)

Binding energy = 1836.149 - 1570.125 - 273 = -7.206Me

Proton binding energy = 3.482MEV

Therefore we must add 3.482 Mev in electrical energy to the proton to produce the breakdown produce. The high energy u-mesons decay into regular u-mesons rapidly and then a split second later decay into photonic energy.

Thus the Einsteinian energy is readily obtained by an pulsating spherical field focussed upon a center point which will convert all proton at the center point to photonic energy. Thus no more need for oil or coal to fuel the world.

That is the problem with Quantum mechanics. Since they do not understand what Einstein understood we must suffer global warming due to lost years in producing the proton to photonic converters. It may be too late but perhaps we can survive long enought to move ahead.

Scientific theories can do damage when scientists rely too heavily upon mathematics and not physical understandings. We have lost 60 years since the atomic bomb by not listening to Einstein. He made mistakes for sure but his basic mass to energy conversion principle was overlooked for all these years.

 

[quantum_wave]

You have a hard task and I don't want to make it seem impossible so let me just start with an observation about what you have given us. The dots are a whole level of order smaller than the particles that quantum physicists have to work with. The quantum physicists use various fundamental particles, various force carriers, and various forces to get to a point that they agree doesn't tell us even what causes mass, let alone gravity.

You are using the facts and figures from quantum physics to explain Dot Theory. But there is a huge gap between the level of order where dots exist and interact and where the standard particle model puts us.

All of our quantified measures tie to the International System of Units (“SI”). The kilogram is a very basic example. If the level of order where the dots interact is very different from the level of order where the standard particle model looks at things, is it appropriate to transfer the SI that has been developed without the knowledge of dots down to the level of order where dots interact and still expect those SI to have meaning?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilogram
The kilogram or kilogramme (symbol: kg) is the base unit of mass in the International System of Units (known also by its French-language initials “SI”). The kilogram is defined as being equal to the mass of the International Prototype Kilogram[1] (IPK; known also by its French-language name Le Grand K[2]), which is almost exactly equal to the mass of one liter of water. It is the only SI base unit with an SI prefix as part of its name. It is also the only SI unit that is still defined in relation to an artifact rather than to a fundamental physical property that can be reproduced in different laboratories.
In everyday usage, the mass of an object in kilograms is often referred to as its weight, although strictly speaking the weight of an object is the gravitational force on it, measured in newtons (see also kilogram-force). Similarly, the avoirdupois pound, used in both the Imperial system and U.S. customary units, is a unit of mass and its related unit of force is the pound-force. The avoirdupois pound is defined as exactly 0.45359237 kg,[3] making one kilogram approximately equal to 2.2046 avoirdupois pounds.
Many units in the SI system are defined relative to the kilogram so its stability is important. After the International Prototype Kilogram had been found to vary in mass over time, the International Committee for Weights and Measures (known also by its French-language initials CIPM) recommended in 2005 that the kilogram be redefined in terms of a fundamental constant of nature:[4] no final decision is expected before 2011.[5]


http://www.springerlink.com/content/r428078427m36034/
Abstract The main versions of the redefinition for the international prototype kilogram are examined for best accuracy and transmitting the mass unit. It is concluded that it is most promising to use Avogadro’s number and the atomic mass unit in order to transfer to a new standard for the kilogram, i.e., to introduce an atomic kilogram.
Key words mass standard unit - international kilogram prototype - Planck’s constant - Avogadro’s number - atomic mass unit
__________
"Translated from Izmeritel’naya Tekhnika, No. 10, pp. 3–5, October, 2006."

My point is that the quantification of the world of dots might be well served by proposing a way to get at the energies and forces of the dot realm independent of the current SI, and then show how the two agree when the gap is crossed. Just working backward to the quantified values at the dot level will infallibly tie out to the real world but the tie out will be more than coincidental and will carry no weight in terms of proven theory.

How do you answer?