Symmetry Every proton contains one electron and two positrons. There is one electron for each proton. There exists a relatively few free positrons and there is a free electron to match each free positrons. Electrons and positrons are created and destroyed only in pairs. So there is exactly the same number of positrons in our Universe as electrons. It is as simple as that. There is no asymmetry in my theory.
The Standard Model is much too complicated: There are no “three generations of particles”. Everything in our Universe is made from tronnies. Two tronnies make an entron. Three tronnies make an electron and three tronnies make a positron. A proton is made from two positrons and one electron plus a very high energy entron and about 15 gamma ray entrons. The gamma ray entrons are released in the course of fusion processes. The very high energy entron is released in the course of proton-antiproton destruction that occurs in Black Holes. This very high energy entron is the neutrino entron and it escapes the Black Holes as a neutrino photon (aka the graviton) to provide the gravity holding galaxies together. Stable atoms are comprised of only protons, electrons and entrons. Each photon is comprised of only one entron. Molecules are comprised of atoms. Gravity is provided by neutrino photons. Everything else in our Universe is made from molecules and atoms. Muons are electrons and entrons or positrons and entrons. There are no quarks or gluons. There is no “strong force”. Atomic nuclei are held together with Coulomb forces provided by the tronnies and the things made from tronnies. All bosons are photons and all fermions including protons are combinations of electrons, positrons and entrons. Photons have mass so their paths can be curved by gravity provided by neutrino photons (gravitons) escaping from massive articles. The exclusion principle results from the fact that electrons are self-propelled at their natural speed of 2.19 X 106 m/s and they orbit in synchronization and repel each other. I don’t have the answer to Mercury’s path and the Bose-Einstein stuff but I am certain that my model will provide a simple explanation. Do you have any reason to believe that it doesn’t? John Ross From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR Sent: Monday, July 21, 2014 2:42 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: The Higgs and "SUSY vs the Multiverse" There is an observed asymmetry in the Universe - if not between matter and antimatter, then between the distribution of positively and negatively charged tronnies. Why would the positive ones end up in protons and the negative ones end up in electrons (or an excess of both, respectively?)That's still an asymmetry which your theory has to address, so it can't be exactly symmetric. Or if it is, it doesn't match the world we observe. It seems to me that your theory, although in principle it simplifies things compared to the Standard Model, requires a lot of extra "epicycles" to make it accord with reality. To be taken seriously you really need everything we observe to fall out neatly and inevitably from the theory - that would include the 3 generations of particles we observe, the properties of all the observed particles, the fermion-boson distinction, the Bose-Einstein stuff, the exclusion principle, and so on. I think you need to get a list of things that are explained by our current theories and see if you can match it - and preferably explain any discrepancies (as General Relativity did with the perihelion advance of Mercury) - plus it should also make extra predictions that will enable your theory to be tested against the existing model experimentally (as General Relativity did with the bending of starlight near the Sun). On 22 July 2014 05:15, John Ross <jr...@trexenterprises.com> wrote: LizR, The simple answer is: “There is no Higgs Boson and there is no Higgs Field.” The particle that gives mass to all other particles is the simple “entron” each of which is a combination of one plus tronnie and one minus tronnie as explained very simply in my Book: “Tronnies –The Source of the Coulomb Force”, available at Amazon.Com. I have attached a copy of Chapter IV, “The Entron” from my book. You’ll need to print it out. I have also attached a copy of a Higgs paper dated 19 October 1964 for those of you who have not read it. I have to admit that, although I have tried, I do not understand his theory. It does appear to deal with a breakdown of symmetry. I will say that my theory is one hundred percent symmetric and contains no symmetry breakdown. If you read my book you will see that our Universe exactly symmetric with exactly the same number of positrons as electrons and exactly the same number of plus tronnies as minus tronnies. Take a guess as to where all of the “missing” positrons are hiding. Entrons, electrons and positrons combine to make protons and anti-protons, which are exactly opposite each other, although happily, there are more protons than anti-protons. There is one entron in each photon. Entrons, electrons, positrons and protons combine to make everything else in our Universe. J Ross From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR Sent: Sunday, July 20, 2014 3:22 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: The Higgs and "SUSY vs the Multiverse" Does no one have any comment / answer / information on this? On 20 July 2014 15:38, LizR <lizj...@gmail.com> wrote: We've just been watching "Particle Fever" - a documentary about the LHC (from 2007 to the discovery of the Higgs boson last year). In it, at least a couple of people (Monica Dunbar and David Kaplan, IIRC) say that a 115GeV Higgs would be a clear sign of Supersymmetry, while a 140GeV (or greater) would indicate a Multiverse (meaning a String Landscape, I assume). The measured value is 126GeV, which apparently leaves everything open for now. They seem quite certain that there is a dichotony - SUSY vs MV - and that the MV answer would effectively be "the end of physics", I assume because the fundamental physics underlying the string landscape is only accessible at scales/energies far beyond those accessible to any currently conceivable experiment. I can't quite see this, so perhaps someone could elaborate. That is, it seems to me unlikely that there is a theory that is going to say the ratio of electron to proton masses is exactly what it is (1:1836.15267245 or so, I believe) and that this emerges from simple principles. Since the proton is a composite "particle" a better example might be the ratio of the electron to muon masses, which I believe is around 1:206.7682821476077. When the chemical elements were being discovered, it became clear that there were simple principles underlying the apparently complexity. There were what seemed like completely different substances, which turned out to be related by simple numbers, e.g. if you take something like 2 grams of hydrogen and 16 grams of oxygen and mix them you get 18 grams of water. (Or whatever the correct figures are.) The point being that these small integer (or almost-integer, but they couldn't measure them accurately enough to realise that at the time) values indicate something simpler underlying the observed complexity, whereas 1:1836.15267245 or 1:206.7682821476077, it seems to me, don't. And so on for the various other dimensionless ratios that abound in the Standard Model, plus the fact that we see neutrinos with only one handedness, the absence of antimatter and various other apparent symmetry breakings This seems to me to indicate that a multiverse could easily be involved, and that the (ahem) string of apparently random values we observed emerge from something like there being 10^500 ways to knot a piece of string in 11 dimensions. What I don't understand is why this would not also allow supersymmetry to exist? Or why would SUSY rule out a multiverse, as the people in the film seemed to think? Or maybe I misunderstood them. Anyone out there with the ability to explain advanced physics to dummies? -- 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.
