On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 7:02 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 6:31 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 2:34 AM, Joseph S. Barrera III
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 5/3/2013 11:07 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
>>>
>>> > What I am saying is that neutrons and protons confo
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 6:31 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 2:34 AM, Joseph S. Barrera III wrote:
>
>> On 5/3/2013 11:07 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
>>
>> > What I am saying is that neutrons and protons conform to the quark
>> models (u,u,d) and (u,u,d) when they are probed at hi
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 2:34 AM, Joseph S. Barrera III wrote:
> On 5/3/2013 11:07 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
>
> > What I am saying is that neutrons and protons conform to the quark
> models (u,u,d) and (u,u,d) when they are probed at high energies. At lower
> energies they are different.
>
> What is
May 4, 2013 2:34 am
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Neutron, Proton and Positron
>
> On 5/3/2013 11:07 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
>
> > What I am saying is that neutrons and protons conform to the quark
> models (u,u,d) and (u,u,d) when they are probed at high energies. At
> lower ener
-
From: Joseph S. Barrera III
To: vortex-l
Sent: Sat, May 4, 2013 2:34 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Neutron, Proton and Positron
On 5/3/2013 11:07 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
> What I am saying is that neutrons and protons conform to the quark
models (u,u,d) and (u,u,d) when they are probed at h
On 5/3/2013 11:07 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
> What I am saying is that neutrons and protons conform to the quark
models (u,u,d) and (u,u,d) when they are probed at high energies. At
lower energies they are different.
What is your model for them at low energies?
- Joe
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 6:28 PM, Joseph S. Barrera III <
jbarr...@slac.stanford.edu> wrote:
> On 5/3/2013 2:02 PM, Axil Axil wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Are you guys positing that a proton is (u, u, d) and a neutron is (u, u,
>> d, e+) but only until you probe it at high energies at which point it
>> suddenl
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 4:28 PM, Joseph S. Barrera III wrote:
> On 5/3/2013 1:00 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
>
>> The positron resides inside the neutron. There is no reason for the
>> positron to leave the neutron as long it is has no association with
>> other particles.
>>
>
> The positron will be su
Sorry that was your quote, I should have highlighted it as follows:
Joe said:
The positron will be subject to EM forces that the neutron is not.
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 6:28 PM, Joseph S. Barrera III <
jbarr...@slac.stanford.edu> wrote:
> On 5/3/2013 2:02 PM, Axil Axil wrote:
>
>> The positron
On 5/3/2013 2:02 PM, Axil Axil wrote:
The positron will be subject to EM forces that the neutron is not.
It all depends on the level that you are looking at. Yes, when looking
at the neutron on from the outside, you statement is correct. But when
looking at the neutron on the inside, the charge
The positron will be subject to EM forces that the neutron is not.
It all depends on the level that you are looking at. Yes, when looking at
the neutron on from the outside, you statement is correct. But when looking
at the neutron on the inside, the charged quarks fell the electrostatic and
magne
On 5/3/2013 1:00 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
The positron resides inside the neutron. There is no reason for the
positron to leave the neutron as long it is has no association with
other particles.
The positron will be subject to EM forces that the neutron is not.
The neutron will be subject to res
On 5/3/2013 1:00 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
The positron resides inside the neutron. There is no reason for the
positron to leave the neutron as long it is has no association with
other particles.
The positron will be subject to EM forces that the neutron is not.
The neutron will be subject to re
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 2:06 PM, Joseph S. Barrera III wrote:
> On 5/3/2013 11:03 AM, Harry Veeder wrote:
>
>> In recent years I began to feel that high energy physics experiments
>> might be places where the properties of sub-atomic particles are *forged
>> rather than discovered. With the positro
On 5/3/2013 11:03 AM, Harry Veeder wrote:
In recent years I began to feel that high energy physics
experiments might be places where the properties of sub-atomic
particles are *forged rather than discovered. With the
positron-in-neutron I can now point to a specific experiment to
illustrate th
That is one possible interpretation. Another possible interpretation is
that a proton under bombardment assumes properties which are consistent
with the standard model of a proton, but in a cool environment the proton
is more like a positron and a neutron.
In recent years I began to feel that high
On 5/2/2013 10:16 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
> This evening -- while thinking outside the confines of the standard
model -- I imagined proton is a neutron with a positron.
Well, first of all, you need a neutrino in there as well, otherwise the
spins won't add up.
But we do know better than we
This evening -- while thinking outside the confines of the standard model
-- I imagined proton is a neutron with a positron. Then I googled "positron
inside neutron" to see if the concept had be considered previously. I found
this letter to the editor of Nature from 1933 where it is proposed by N.
18 matches
Mail list logo
