The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Where does the mass of the particle come from?  (Read 9945 times)

lyner

  • Guest
Where does the mass of the particle come from?
« Reply #25 on: 21/06/2009 23:09:31 »
Understanding Physics by Jim Breithaupf . Publisher Stanley Thornes will tell you a lot.
 

Offline witsend

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
    • View Profile
    • Magnetic field model that enables overunity of electric systems
Where does the mass of the particle come from?
« Reply #26 on: 21/06/2009 23:59:58 »
Sophiecentaur,

Thanks for the suggestion. I was rather hoping you'd recommend a link.  It will be ages before I'll get that book.  We live in Africa - not renowned for it's ready supply of superior text books.

This is so nice.  Civilized communication.  You must try and maintain it.
 

lyner

  • Guest
Where does the mass of the particle come from?
« Reply #27 on: 22/06/2009 00:30:46 »
You should see some of my other stuff.
 

Offline witsend

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
    • View Profile
    • Magnetic field model that enables overunity of electric systems
Where does the mass of the particle come from?
« Reply #28 on: 22/06/2009 10:31:38 »
You should see some of my other stuff.Sophiecentuar

Are you proud of it?  I would sooner feel smug if I persuaded someone with reasoned argument.

By the way SophieC, I've posted something in Socratus' new thread. You may find it a little eccentric, not strictly in line with classical thinking.  I would LOVE a reasoned argument as to why it's wrong.  As mentioned I'm sure it is.  But PLEASE, try and keep your argument to the point.  I LOVE being persuaded by argument.  I'm only deaf to personal attack.

 

lyner

  • Guest
Where does the mass of the particle come from?
« Reply #29 on: 22/06/2009 11:51:15 »
You should see some of my other stuff.Sophiecentuar

Are you proud of it?  I would sooner feel smug if I persuaded someone with reasoned argument.

No. I was just hoping that you would see that I converse rationally with people who give rational arguments.
 

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
Where does the mass of the particle come from?
« Reply #30 on: 22/06/2009 16:20:29 »
Can ‘Theory of Ideal Gas’ be model of Vacuum ?
========== .

/ John /

#
I think the ideal gas is a good analogy of the vacuum
except the ideal gas sub-particles all travel at the speed of light C.
 / jerrygg38 /


  This does not mean that they are all traveling at a linear speed of C. Some ideal gas subparticles may be in standing wave patterns. Some spinning around at C. Some oscillating spherically, while spinning, and moving in a linear motion.
  The total energy in that case would be constant. thus the space molecule would have a constant energy
   E= MC2
 The momentum would be conserved in that
   (Spherical + Angular + Linear) = Constant

  Therefore we have a tradeoff between spherical, angular, and linear momentum.
  A photon has mostly linear momentum. A proton has a combination of spherical and angular momtum.

=========================
jerrygg38
I think the ideal gas is a good analogy of the vacuum
========== .
S.
!!!
========= .
jerrygg38
except the ideal gas sub-particles all travel at the speed of light C.
======== .
S.
Sorry.
What are parameters of your ‘‘ the ideal gas sub-particles’ ?
=========== .
jerrygg38
This does not mean that they are all traveling only
at a linear speed of C.
 Some ideal gas subparticles may be in standing wave patterns.
======= .
S.
Can you show ‘the ideal gas subparticles’ and
‘ the ideal wave patterns ‘ and interaction between them ?
====== .
jerrygg38
Some oscillating spherically, while spinning,
and moving in a linear motion.
  The total energy in that case would be constant.
thus the space molecule would have a constant energy
   E= MC2
 The momentum would be conserved in that
   (Spherical + Angular + Linear) = Constant
========= .
S.
After mixing all motions together(Spherical + Angular + Linear)
 we have  = Constant = a constant energy    E= MC2
Not exactly clear  …but interesting …. !!!
======== .
jerrygg38
  Therefore we have a trade off  between
 spherical, angular, and linear momentum.
========== .
S.
Therefore we have a trade . . .
I am afraid it can be a monkey trade.
Sorry.
==== .
jerrygg38
  A photon has mostly linear momentum.
======== .
S.
Maybe mostly yes , maybe mostly no.
======= .
jerrygg38
A proton has a combination of spherical and angular momentum.
======== .
S.
No mostly . .???
!!!
========= .
Best wishes.
S.



 

Offline jerrygg38

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 781
  • Thanked: 27 times
    • View Profile
Where does the mass of the particle come from?
« Reply #31 on: 23/06/2009 15:29:15 »

========== .
S.
!!!
========= .
jerrygg38
except the ideal gas sub-particles all travel at the speed of light C.
======== .
S.
Sorry.
What are parameters of your ‘‘ the ideal gas sub-particles’ ?
[quote}
=========== .

JGG: They are my dot-waves. The high energy dot-wave has an energy:

   Ed = 1.616252E-28

 The number in front of the exponent is the same as Planks radius exponent.

  This energy is the result of a plus dot of charge of 5.391237E-37 combining with a minus dot of the same charge at the Plank radius.
   Ed = K Qd Qd/ Rpl

  The energy of the low energy dot-wave depends upon the circumference of the universe
  E = hC/ 2pi Ru = 2.427E-52 joules

  The universe is filled with both low energy and high energy dot-waves

======= .
S.
Can you show ‘the ideal gas subparticles’ and
‘ the ideal wave patterns ‘ and interaction between them ?
====== .

   Plus dots attract minus dots. They combine to form bipolar dots. Plus dots repel minus dots. However once they are within the Plank radius, they combine. Thus at the big bang we got huge numbers of plus and minus dots all combined together.
  In general we will not find subparticles composed of only plus dots. They form combinations of equal numbers of plus and minus dots with additional numbers of plus or minus dots.

   In space combinations of dots are continually combining and breaking apart. 


========= .
S.
After mixing all motions together(Spherical + Angular + Linear)
 we have  = Constant = a constant energy    E= MC2
Not exactly clear  …but interesting …. !!!


The Heisenbery uncertainty principle shows that linear momentum is not conserved. The reason is that at any interaction linear momentum can transform into angular momentum. However my dot-waves also oscillated from a radius to the Plank radius. The contraction and expansion of the dot-wave either in a plane surface or a spherical surface I call spherical momentum.
   Therefore in order to conserve momentum and agree with the Heisenbergy principle, it is clear that one solution is that the total sum of all momentums is constant,
  Therefore when two dot-waves interact or two particles interact, we cannot tell what direction the particles will go within the uncertainty.
  A photon can enter the electron, the energy of the photon becomes part of the energy level of the electron. However the momentum is not guaranteed.

 

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
Where does the mass of the particle come from?
« Reply #32 on: 24/06/2009 06:15:48 »

========= .
S.
After mixing all motions together(Spherical + Angular + Linear)
 we have  = Constant = a constant energy    E= MC2
Not exactly clear  …but interesting …. !!!


The Heisenbery uncertainty principle shows that linear momentum is not conserved. The reason is that at any interaction linear momentum can transform into angular momentum. However my dot-waves also oscillated from a radius to the Plank radius. The contraction and expansion of the dot-wave either in a plane surface or a spherical surface I call spherical momentum.
   Therefore in order to conserve momentum and agree with the Heisenbergy principle, it is clear that one solution is that the total sum of all momentums is constant,
  Therefore when two dot-waves interact or two particles interact, we cannot tell what direction the particles will go within the uncertainty.
  A photon can enter the electron, the energy of the photon becomes part of the energy level of the electron. However the momentum is not guaranteed.

=============
#
jerrygg38
The Heisenberg uncertainty principle shows that linear momentum
 is not conserved.
====.
S.
!!!
========== .
jerrygg38
 The reason is that at any interaction linear momentum
 can transform into angular momentum.
========== .
S.
And vice versa.
=============== .
jerrygg38
However my dot-waves also oscillated from a radius to the Plank radius.
========= .
S.
Is it possible to say what this process goes around the Plank radius ?
========== .
jerrygg38
 The contraction and expansion of the dot-wave either in a plane
 surface or a spherical surface I call spherical momentum.
======== .
S.
Is this process goes around the Plank radius (spherical surface ) ?
Is this spherical momentum connected with spherical surface ?
========= .
jerrygg38
   Therefore in order to conserve momentum and agree with the
 Heisenberg principle, it is clear that one solution is that the total
 sum of all momentums is constant,
========== .
S.
Something here is wrong.
Why?
You say:
1.
The Heisenberg uncertainty principle shows that linear momentum
 is not conserved.
2.
The reason is that at any interaction linear momentum
 can transform into angular momentum.
 
It means that according to Heisenberg principle neither linear
momentum nor angular momentum are constant parameters.
But you try to conserve momentum.
Why?
Is it because from school we were studied about the law
 of momentum’s  conservation, energy conservation . . etc ?

And then you say: ‘it is clear that one solution is that the total
 sum of all momentums is constant,’.

But the law is named :
 " The law of conservation and transformation energy / mass"
And nobody in the school taught us : ‘What does the Law of
transformation energy / mass  means according to one single
 quantum of light or one single electron ?’
============= .
jerrygg38
  Therefore when two dot-waves interact or two particles interact,
 we cannot tell what direction the particles will go within the uncertainty.
===== .
S.
In my opinion the Heisenberg principle shows that particles
 can have different  momentums.
========= .
jerrygg38
  A photon can enter the electron, the energy of the photon becomes part
of the energy level of the electron.
======= .
S.
Questions:
Can photon and electron be one and the same particle
 in different conditions ?
Can the difference between photon and electron depends
 only from  frequency ?
Answer:
May 23, 2009.
I think not just frequency, but phasing and polarity will differ.

David M. Rountree, AES
Scientific Paranormal Investigative
Research Information and Technology

www.spinvestigations.org

So.
Not just frequency, phasing , but momentum  also
 will be differ when electron ( or photon) changes its behavior.
=============================== . . .
jerrygg38
However the momentum is not guaranteed.
====== .
S.
However the conversation of momentum is not guaranteed
 and is not constant parameter .

========== .
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik. / Socratus.
============== .

 

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
Where does the mass of the particle come from?
« Reply #33 on: 24/06/2009 17:36:21 »
Ones again.
#
jerrygg38 wrote:
   Therefore in order to conserve momentum and agree with the
 Heisenberg principle, it is clear that one solution is that the total
 sum of all momentums is constant,
======= .
S.
We have two momentums:
linear momentum and angular momentum ( maybe more).
And jerrygg38  says:
‘ that the total  sum of all momentums is constant,’.
How it was saying simply  . . ‘ sum of all momentums ‘ !!!

And I remembered that Eddington said:

We used to think that if we knew one, we knew two,
 because one and one are two. We are finding
 that we must learn a great deal more about `and '.

In others words, when we have one linear momentum
 and one angular momentum that we must learn a great
 deal more about `sum’. Because ‘sum’ must be some Law,
which connected the ‘one’ and ‘ one’ to ‘sum ’.
============ .
Regards.
S.
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Where does the mass of the particle come from?
« Reply #33 on: 24/06/2009 17:36:21 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums