Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
Biology
BiologyBotanyMicrobiologyEntomologyEvolutionPaleontology
Chemistry
General ChemistryAnalytical ChemistryElectrochemistryOrganic Synthesis
Earth Science
GeologyMineralogyOceanographyMeteorologyEarthquakes
Physics
General PhysicsResearchRelativityParticle PhysicsElectromagnetismFusionOpticsAcousticsNew Theories

Natural Science Forum / Physics / Particle Physics / January 2005



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Structure of the Lepto-Quark

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Jack Sarfatti - 19 Jan 2005 20:32 GMT
http://stardrive.org

> On Jan 19, 2005, at 10:33 AM, Gary S. Bekkum wrote:
>
>" Hi Paul,
>
> I am cc to Jack ...
>
> Hotmail apparently lost the mail you sent cc to me yesterday.  I did however see in Andrei's reply:
>
> [Paul?]
>
> I do not believe it is possible to deduce that gravity is important to a realistic description of what holds the electron together. Also, I do not believe that linear methods -- eigenfunctions and eigenvalues -- are good enough here.
>
> I don't know who is writing this however to cite Niels Bohr, you may not believe it, but it is true anyway - whoever you are.
>
> In fact, if you speak of stable configurations -- EITHER static or dynamic -- for a real set of fields over 3+1-D space-time, then this is a subject very well known in Russia!  The classic book on The Skyrme Model by Makhankov, Rybakov and Sanyuk is properly a Bible in this area. It shows how a truly nonlinear field model is essential, to explain the existence of stable vortices of force, like the electron.  Rybakov and Sanyuk are still at Moscow State University -- or were,  last I heard.
>
> In fact, I actually believe I have found this day the first truly viable realistic model for the electron."

Jack Sarfatti replied:

> Let's see it. Remember, I deduce a critical momentum transfer of ~ 10^-18 cm for the electron to SHRINK to a point of zero radius, by having the electron micro-geon have a fixed physical radius of e^2/mc^2 with a zero point virtual cloud of scale h/mc ~ 10^-11 cm i.e. /\zpf ~ (mc/h)^2
>
> i.e. the experimental numbers 10^-18 cm, 10^-13 cm and 10^-11 cm are all linked together in the simple Schwarzschild geon "Mass without mass" idea of Wheeler's geometrodynamics via
>
> Apparent size of lepto-quark micro-geon at scattering momentum transfer p
>
> (Circumference/FIXED Radius) ~ [1 - (8pi/3)/\zpf(e^2/mc^2)^3(p/h)]
>
> Where the virtual zero point plasma dressing cloud scale surrounding the micro-geon hard core is /\zpf^-1/2.
>
> 0 = [1 - (8pi/3)/\zpf(e^2/mc^2)^3(p/h)]
>
> i.e. when  e^2/mc^2 ~ 10^-13 cm, p/h ~ 10^18 cm^-1
>
> Then /\zpf ~ (mc/h)^2 ~ 10^22 cm^-2
>
> i.e. 10 /\zpf10^-39 10^18 ~ 10-22/\zpf = 1
>
> This is NOT a random coincidence, but an important physical idea that demands Bohm's interpretation of quantum theory.
>
> A more realistic model will be to use the one of A. Burinski in Moscow based on the Kerr-Newman geon rather than the Schwarschild one I use above.
John Enockson - 20 Jan 2005 03:27 GMT
> Let's see it. Remember, I deduce a critical momentum transfer of ~ 10^-18 cm for the electron to SHRINK to a point of zero radius, by having the electron micro-geon have a fixed physical radius of e2/mc2 with a zero point virtual cloud of scale h/mc ~ 10^-11 cm i.e. /\zpf ~ (mc/h)2
>
[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
>
> A more realistic model will be to use the one of A. Burinski in Moscow based on the Kerr-Newman geon rather than the Schwarschild one I use above.
John Enockson - 20 Jan 2005 03:42 GMT
>> I do not believe it is possible to deduce that gravity is important to
>> a realistic description of what holds the electron together. Also, I
>> do not believe that linear methods -- eigenfunctions and eigenvalues
>> -- are good enough here.

Wrong the GTE considers gravity essential in this.

>> I don't know who is writing this however to cite Niels Bohr, you may
>> not believe it, but it is true anyway - whoever you are.
>>
>> In fact, if you speak of stable configurations -- EITHER static or
>> dynamic -- for a real set of fields over 3+1-D space-time, then this
>> is a subject very well known in Russia!

Pseudo argument rule number one (1)! The farther away the occurance the
more convoluted the event.

  The classic book on The
>> Skyrme Model by Makhankov, Rybakov and Sanyuk is properly a Bible in
>> this area. It shows how a truly nonlinear field model is essential, to
>> explain the existence of stable vortices of force, like the electron.  
>> Rybakov and Sanyuk are still at Moscow State University -- or were,  
>> last I heard.

You could check. Or maybe you can't for obvious reasons.

>> In fact, I actually believe I have found this day the first truly
>> viable realistic model for the electron."

Get in line, this has been done before. And better.

> Jack Sarfatti replied:
>
>> Let's see it. Remember, I deduce a critical momentum transfer of ~
>> 10^-18 cm for the electron to SHRINK to a point of zero radius,

Momentum transfer of a lenght. What no time? Mass? Sense?

>> having the electron micro-geon have a fixed physical radius of
>> e^2/mc^2 with a zero point virtual cloud of scale h/mc ~ 10^-11 cm
>> i.e. /\zpf ~ (mc/h)^2

>> i.e. the experimental numbers 10^-18 cm, 10^-13 cm and 10^-11 cm are
>> all linked together in the simple Schwarzschild geon "Mass without
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>> Where the virtual zero point plasma dressing cloud scale surrounding
>> the micro-geon hard core is /\zpf^-1/2.

"hard core" equals quantum illiteracy. First year physics review is in
order here. Jack time to hit the books again. And please show your work
this time.

>> 0 = [1 - (8pi/3)/\zpf(e^2/mc^2)^3(p/h)]
>>
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>> This is NOT a random coincidence, but an important physical idea that
>> demands Bohm's interpretation of quantum theory.

This is piffel and you fall short in explaining any of it.

>> A more realistic model will be to use the one of A. Burinski in Moscow
>> based on the Kerr-Newman geon rather than the Schwarschild one I use
>> above.

Maybe a reprogramming of the random piffel language nonsense generator
is required to make literal sense out of any word sequence exceeeding
two (2) verbal units in your future posts.

C-

I recommend you take up grave robbing.
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.