 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Natural Science Forum / Physics / General Physics / February 2008neutron as molecular positronium...
Hi all... I have the idea that perhaps neutrons and protons actually consist of a high number of bound positronium atoms. This theory has some nice features: 1) Explains the deficit of antimatter in the universe (it's mostly tied up in protons and neutrons) 2) Eliminates the need for quarks (simplification) 3) Qualitatively I could see such a structure binding strongly at close distances (possibly explaining the strong force) This theory could be, and probably is, totally wacko. But, I was interested if anybody could guide me towards exploring this idea either computationally or analytically. I have a BS in physics - so I'm no expert, but I at least have a formal education in the basics of quantum mechanics. As I said, I don't have much confidence that this theory is correct, but it would be interesting to prove quantitatively whether it is or not. > I have the idea that perhaps neutrons and protons actually consist of... Here's what the experimental data shows... summarized nicely http://pdg.lbl.gov/index.html http://pdg.lbl.gov/2005/listings/contents_listings.html http://particleadventure.org/frameless/chart_cutouts/particle_chart.jpg > jah...@gmail.com wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > http://pdg.lbl.gov/2005/listings/contents_listings.html > http://particleadventure.org/frameless/chart_cutouts/particle_chart.jpg Well, that kind of misses the point really. I would say those references detail one theory which is consistent with experimental data. Of course, by limiting the regime of experiments it's fully possible for more than one theory to agree (ex. general relativity and newtonian gravity). So I suppose the idea would be my alternative theory would provide new predications beyond the current theory. Anyhow, it would be fun to game out the idea with some quantum simulations (I doubt this problem could be solved analytically) and I wondered if anyone had experience with that. >> jah...@gmail.com wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > simulations (I doubt this problem could be solved analytically) and I > wondered if anyone had experience with that. Simulations are often flawed... do real experiments to test your theory. > jah...@gmail.com wrote: > >> jah...@gmail.com wrote: [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Umm...disregarding the fact that I don't have access to a multi- billion dollar experimental apparatus...you first need predictions to test before you can perform an experiment. > Umm...disregarding the fact that I don't have access to a multi- > billion dollar experimental apparatus...you first need predictions to > test before you can perform an experiment. That's for sure... what testable predictions does you model make that are different from QED, QCD and the standard model? > Hi all... > > I have the idea that perhaps neutrons and protons actually consist of > a high number of bound positronium atoms. This theory has some nice > features: [snip crap] Neutrons have zero dipole moment and zero quadrupole moment. Neutrons are not leptons. > This theory could be, and probably is, totally wacko. Emprically falsified as a fat lady is not a damp igneous rock. [snip remainder]  SignatureUncle Al http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/ (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals) http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2 On Feb 28, 9:35 am, jah...@gmail.com wrote: > Hi all... > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > but it would be interesting to prove quantitatively whether it is or > not. The main problem is that you're ignoring a large body of experimental evidence already in hand that uniquely distinguishes an electromagnetic interaction with charge doublets from the strong interaction with color octets. The experimental evidence indicates that the former cannot account for them, while the latter can. Some examples of *experimental* results (not theoretical constructions): - the presence of hard scattering centers in the proton and neutron and the count that shows there are three of them (as opposed to two or a whole bunch) - observed isospin selection rules - 3-jet events at TASSO - the confirmation of a charm-anticharm meson whose existence was uniquely predicted by the GSM mechanism - the confirmation of the omega-minus baryon, along with its mass being as predicted - observed neutral current interactions - K-long/K-short oscillation - the measured difference between charged and neutral pion lifetimes PD > On Feb 28, 9:35 am, jah...@gmail.com wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Fair enough - while I'm not surprised the "theory" can be thrown out immediately based on current evidence, I still think it would be interesting to simulate bound states of multiple positronum atoms. Anyhow I appreciate the civil response...apparently, theoretical musings, even when qualified with a disclaimer that they're probably wildly wrong, inspire anger and spite in this group. Sigh. |
Reply to this Message |
 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.