Tronnies are each a point focus of Coulomb forces.  Coulomb forces spread out 
from this focus point in all directions at the speed of light.  The tronnies 
travel in circles at speeds of (π/2)c so each tronnie is always at the focus of 
its own Coulomb force waves directed along the diameter of its circle.  By the 
time the tronnie has completed one cycle its coulomb forces have completed 360 
degrees.  In entrons the tronnies cycle at frequencies of about 1.5 billion 
cycles per second to about 160 trillion trillion cycles per second (160 X 1024 
cyc/s). 

 

I don’ know  what they detected.  I don’t think they know.  My guess is they 
detected high-energy protons, maybe some high-energy anti-protons, high-energy 
electrons,  high-energy positrons and high-energy entrons.  They may have 
detected some neutrino entrons, but these babies are very hard to detect.  I 
understand that they think they detected some neutrinos in an underground 
neutrino detector many miles from Cern.  These were probably neutrino photons. 

 

I have not done the math to demonstrate all the forces acting within an alpha 
particle and between alpha particles.  I invite all readers to do the math.  
Actually, the math may not be too complicated.  We know the exact path of the 
protons and the electrons within the alpha particle.  We can probably assume 
that in the carbon nucleus the alpha particles are approximately stationary, 
since carbon-12 has zero spin. 

 

I don’t know how to do computer modeling.  Again I invite all readers that can 
do computer modeling based on my model.  If you are the first to prove I am 
right, you may be in for a big prize. 

 

I don’t understand RM and virtual practice.

 

From: everything-list@googlegroups.com 
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR
Sent: Saturday, June 07, 2014 4:36 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: TRONNIES - SPACE

 

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.

-- 
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.

Reply via email to