# The Naked Scientists Forum

### Author Topic: Verns Equation  (Read 2602 times)

#### Mr. Scientist

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 1451
• Thanked: 2 times
##### Verns Equation
« on: 13/11/2009 12:58:20 »
Hi Vern,

i remember reading your theory almost a year ago, and i remember a derivation you made to account for some ''circular motion'' - or something like that. You said it was quite basic, but nevertheless i would love to see it again, as to attain how to unify all these manipulations i have been doing and so to satisfy your equations derivation.

Thanks

#### Vern

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 2072
##### Verns Equation
« Reply #1 on: 13/11/2009 18:35:28 »
I came up with several very simple equations that define the sizes and charges on the shell structure of nucleons. This C source code for the square-of-the-shells calculator contains most of them.

Professor Willis Thompson read my Photon Theory speculation and wrote the paper linked. It has a simple derivation for particle size based upon the wave length of equivalent energy.

The equation is: d  =  h  / pi *  mc Where d is the diameter of the particle, h is Planck's constant and pi is the constant PI, and mc is mass times the speed of light.
« Last Edit: 13/11/2009 18:43:43 by Vern »

#### Mr. Scientist

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 1451
• Thanked: 2 times
##### Verns Equation
« Reply #2 on: 14/11/2009 00:55:52 »
Thanks. It's going to be harder than what i currently thought. I was attempting to analyse your thoory with tensor calculus, but you certainly have some avid predictions, and admittadly, some terminology i am not used to.  But i'll study it.

#### Mr. Scientist

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 1451
• Thanked: 2 times
##### Verns Equation
« Reply #3 on: 14/11/2009 01:07:17 »
Vern, did any of your derivations have units of rest energy of vector form a solution?

#### Vern

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 2072
##### Verns Equation
« Reply #4 on: 14/11/2009 14:32:30 »
Quote
Vern, did any of your derivations have units of rest energy of vector form a solution?

I am not sure I understand your question. By vector form I guess you mean a direction and a magnitude. Intermediate steps do contain vectors but I can't recall a solution in the form of a vector. The elementary predictions I solved for were the sizes and the charges at the circumference of nuclear constituents. This was with very simple first-year algebra type arithmetic. I started with some very simple postulates:

With the mass and the charge of the electron taken as unity. In terms of electron units.
Postulate: The final irreducible constituent of all physical reality is the electromagnetic field. (From Maxwell)

Postulate: Atomic nuclei exist as a shell structure. (From Dr. Robert Hofstadter of Stanford)

Postulate: The outer-shell mass of a neutron is the difference between proton and neutron mass. (Vernon Brown, that's me)

Postulate: Subsequent shell mass is the square of the mass of the next shell out. (Vernon Brown)

I wrote a little C program to calculate this and discovered the results of it predicted the value of the strong nuclear interaction as well as the dynamics of the strong nuclear interaction. The electric charge of shells 2 and 3 provide the value, the link shows the dynamics.

« Last Edit: 14/11/2009 17:31:18 by Vern »

#### Vern

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 2072
##### Verns Equation
« Reply #5 on: 14/11/2009 15:35:17 »
Recent Posts - Naked Scientists Discussion Forum
I wrote a little C program to calculate this and discovered the results of it predicted the value of the strong nuclear interaction as well as the dynamics ...
www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?action=recent - Similar

#### Mr. Scientist

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 1451
• Thanked: 2 times
##### Verns Equation
« Reply #6 on: 15/11/2009 00:52:12 »
And, how accurate are the predictions of the C-program Model?

#### Vern

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 2072
##### Verns Equation
« Reply #7 on: 15/11/2009 14:03:51 »
They are off by .00948 MeV for the mass, energy, and charge values of the neutron and proton. We know those values to several decimal points better than that, however, there is a coupling constant in the system that can erase the error. I didn't bother to derive the equation for the constant. No one would accept it. However there is such a constant present in the make up of the chemical element combinations. It seems natural that there would be such a constant present in the make up of nucleons.
« Last Edit: 15/11/2009 21:13:35 by Vern »

#### The Naked Scientists Forum

##### Verns Equation
« Reply #7 on: 15/11/2009 14:03:51 »