On 8 June 2014 07:39, John Ross <jr...@trexenterprises.com> wrote: > Thanks for your serious questions. The answers are simple. > > > > · There is no “strong force”. Strong forces do hold atomic > nuclei together. These forces are all Coulomb forces. According to > Coulomb’s Law, as the distance between charged particles approach zero the > forces between them approach infinity. Now an infinite force would be a > “strong” force. > My nuclear physics is a bit rusty but I can see that this would be true for point particles (force -> infinity). But I still can't see how the arrangement of these particles is so exactly controlled, as I assume it needs to be (because you require infinite precision for these contuous forces to work correctly - unless you explain how the system deals with perturbations, as I've asked a few times.)
> · Forces between alpha particles (with a net charge of plus two) > are repulsive at long range. At a zero range the forces are also > repulsive. In between the forces between alpha exactly balance at a > particular distance in many configurations, but certainly not all. That is > why the nuclei of carbon-12, oxygen-16, neon-20 etc. are stable. Two alpha > particles close together are stable for only an extremely short period of > time in beryllium-4 which decays into two alpha particles. For Be-4 there > is no perfect distance where attractive and repulsive forces balance. > Can you show us the maths that proves all this? Or is it just adding up the charges involved, which isn't exactly (heehee) rocket science? > · My theory accounts for everything that I have put it to test > on. My entron (which is two tronnies circling at diameters that range from > about 0.9339 X 10-18 m to a few centimeters) does the job that the Higgs > Boson is suppose to do. That is, provide mass to other particles. The > entron provides all of the mass in our Universe except for the masses of > the electron and the positron. There is one entron in each photon. (All > our brilliant scientist need to do is open their eyes to see millions of > particles that provide mass to other particles.) When you are lying in the > sun soaking up photons from the sun, your mass increased slightly with each > photon absorbed. You lose a little mass when infrared entrons radiate out > of your body as infrared and millimeter wave photons. There is no Higgs > Boson. Billions are being spent on a wild goose chase. Entrons are > describe in Chapter III. > So what *did *they detect? > · My model does not include quarks; however, I explain in Chapter > VIII the internal structure of the proton. The structure of neutrons are > described in Chapter XII. No quarks are needed. > > · As to cosmic rays and colliders, I am aware of nothing that > indicates to me that the experimental evidence is inconsistent with my > model. Some of the interpretations are inconsistent. > Well you should check everything you can and work out whether it's consistent with the RM. Have you performed any computer simulations to see whether your model of nuclei etc works "in virtual practice" ? You might find there are no stable organisations of tronnies in the numbers you think. John R. > > > > > > *From:* everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto: > everything-list@googlegroups.com] *On Behalf Of *meekerdb > *Sent:* Friday, June 06, 2014 9:05 PM > > *To:* everything-list@googlegroups.com > *Subject:* Re: TRONNIES - SPACE > > > > On 6/6/2014 7:54 PM, LizR wrote: > > On 7 June 2014 14:00, John Ross <jr...@trexenterprises.com> wrote: > > > If you had a copy of my book you would see that the center portion of the > alpha is comprised of four circling protons and two electrons are circling > the path of the four protons, so the alpha particle is positive on the > inside and negative on the outside. (FIG 11 ON PAGE 97 is a drawing of an > alpha particle.) The result is that the combination of two alpha particles > is extremely unstable, but the combinations of 3 through 10 alpha particles > are all totally stable. In these nuclei the four positive protons in the > center of the alpha is attracted to the two electrons in outside portion of > its neighbor alpha particle. So, for example in the carbon-12 nucleus, at > the right distances the attractive Coulomb forces in the three alpha > particles exactly balance the repulsive coulomb forces, so carbon-12 is > stable. NO STRONG FORCE NEEDED! > > > > So doesn't the strong force account for anything else? (Honest question, I > don't know if there is any other need for it apart from holding nuclei > together). > > > But the strong force needs to be short range while the EM force is long > range. Otherwise, even if there were and equilibrium point, a nucleus > wouldn't be stable. > > Brent > > > Does your model account for what happens in high energy collisions between > nuclei, as for example in a collider or when a cosmic ray enters the > atmosphere? I believe that stuff involves quark jets and production of > various short lived particles (e.g. the Higgs boson) and all sorts of other > stuff that is explained quite well by the existing model. Have you examined > any of this any can you similarly account for it? > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
