The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?  (Read 107974 times)

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 584
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #75 on: 24/11/2010 03:06:34 »
Ron, about your now old question about how the collision of 2 photons would create a particle, it is just a matter of just the right amount of relative energy of the 2 photons colliding and about the symmetry of the collision of the charges. The best way is a frontal collision, if the 2 + or the 2 - charges collide and merge together, the other 2 opposite charges will merge automatically. For dark matter particles, the charges annihilate each other. For matter created shortly after the BigBang it is much more complicated. That is why the LHC is so important. But i guess they won't find the Higgs boson...

About black holes, dark matter and dark energy, i urge you to watch "Through the wormhole" with Morgan Freeman, specially "The Riddle of black holes" and "Beyond the darkness" episodes. You will see how my model answers so many questions... It is so well made and actual...
« Last Edit: 04/12/2010 17:12:33 by CPT ArkAngel »
 

Offline peppercorn

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1466
    • View Profile
    • solar
Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #76 on: 24/11/2010 10:33:12 »
But I guess they won't find the Higgs boson..

Is your 'guess' based on anything?
 

Offline Geezer

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8328
  • "Vive la résistance!"
    • View Profile
Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #77 on: 24/11/2010 18:37:11 »
But I guess they won't find the Higgs boson..

Is your 'guess' based on anything?

Perhaps it's based on a desire to be able to say something like "See! I told you so."?

The question is, will we ever hear anything to the contrary if they do find it.
 

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 584
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #78 on: 25/11/2010 00:53:23 »
I am not this kind of person. :D

I just think the photon is the sole elementary particle. According to this thinking, there is no Higgs field. The LHC still might produce heavy dark matter particles looking like Higgs bosons, but that would be a mislead. I found too many answers from this theory to think it is just a matter of chances... I don't say i am totally right... I need time to work on it.

"Unfortunately if you try and write down a theory of particles and their interactions then the simplest version requires all the masses of the particles to be zero. So on one hand we have a whole variety of masses and on the other a theory in which all masses should be zero. Such conundrums provide the excitement and the challenges of science. "

from: http://www.phy.uct.ac.za/courses/phy400w/particle/higgs2.htm

I understand why sometimes you have a bad perception of me and i will try to behave myself accordingly. We all need devil's advocates. I really don't hope or expect to get fame or anything glorious of it... But it would be nice to meet in person people who participate on this forum.


« Last Edit: 02/12/2010 04:20:38 by CPT ArkAngel »
 

Offline Geezer

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8328
  • "Vive la résistance!"
    • View Profile
Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #79 on: 25/11/2010 06:50:22 »
I'll go one better than you. Personally, I believe that all matter is simply a manifestation of energy encapsulated in space/time. This might be the same as, or a variation of, String Theory.

However, as I'm in no position back up my opinion with anything other than anecdotal evidence, there is little point in me saying much about it.
 

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 584
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #80 on: 25/11/2010 15:52:22 »
This looks like another way to see the same thing (maybe a wider perspective). Are photons particles travelling through empty space or are they waves of energy travelling in the fabric of spacetime? I think both points of view are valuable.

If anyone think my evidences are anecdotal it is because they did not read it carefully and or they did not take my point of view in analysing actual problems of Physics. I posted a small fraction of all the evidences i have found...

The String theories seem to be very promising in the long term.
« Last Edit: 25/11/2010 17:53:32 by CPT ArkAngel »
 

Offline QuantumClue

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 613
    • View Profile
Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #81 on: 26/11/2010 05:24:33 »
Well, Hawking does not beleive we will find it... He outranks us all.
 

Offline JP

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3366
  • Thanked: 2 times
    • View Profile
Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #82 on: 26/11/2010 06:29:47 »
Regardless of whether we find it or not, the useful thing about the theories that predict it is that they predict it. In other words, they make concrete, testable predictions that can be checked.  If we don't find it, we know they're wrong.

The problem with a lot of all-matter-is-photon theories is that they don't do this, so they're not of much use to physicists.

 

Offline Geezer

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8328
  • "Vive la résistance!"
    • View Profile
Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #83 on: 26/11/2010 08:16:46 »

The problem with a lot of all-matter-is-photon theories is that they don't do this, so they're not of much use to physicists.


Doesn't that rather depend on what type of physicist one is? Personally, I find them quite useful.
 

Offline peppercorn

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1466
    • View Profile
    • solar
Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #84 on: 26/11/2010 11:11:46 »
The problem with a lot of all-matter-is-photon theories is that they don't do this, so they're not of much use to physicists.
Doesn't that rather depend on what type of physicist one is? Personally, I find them quite useful.

They could potentially be quite useful (along with pretty much any 'flavour' of theory) if they made testable predictions - but where are these predictions (predictions that can be described as a set of equations)?
 

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 584
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #85 on: 26/11/2010 16:47:22 »
we predicted the sizes of any particle if we have its mass... It totally agrees with recent measurements, size is inversely proportional to the mass (for elementary particle).

I predict many things about the Bigbang, blackholes, dark matter and dark energy, but we have to wait...

For more maths, i need much time which i don't have. But instead of being lazy critics you could help... ;)
« Last Edit: 27/11/2010 03:39:46 by CPT ArkAngel »
 

Offline peppercorn

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1466
    • View Profile
    • solar
Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #86 on: 26/11/2010 20:07:12 »
I predicted many things about the Bigbang, blackholes, dark matter and dark energy, but we have to wait...

When you say "I predicted", I can only take that to mean that when, forty plus years ago, when you wrote up your completed (mathematically descriptive) physics paper (that you, for some reason, chose not to publish), you had a full theoretical model predicting all these phenomena that pre-dated the works of Harking, Penrose et al.
 

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 584
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #87 on: 03/12/2010 04:12:26 »
Concerning the Doppler effect, it is interesting to look at how the conservation of information may occur. The original frequency of the photon at its creation, convey the information about the particle it comes from. The original frequencies of photons have to exist in finite and specific quantum possibilities in order to have the possibility of retrieving the information... Quantization is thus necessary for the conservation of information. This is an important link between Quantum Theory and Relativity. This is a clue toward the understanding of the quantization phenomenon. It has a profound implication: nothing can have an infinite acceleration (thus impossible infinite gravitational force)... In the contrary, information would be lost forever... This is why we need the relativity of mass and a finite maximum velocity of C.
« Last Edit: 03/12/2010 16:54:14 by CPT ArkAngel »
 

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 584
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #88 on: 11/12/2010 08:04:56 »
Model for Black Holes using the Planck Length

Three observations i made attracted my attention recently.

The first one is that many galaxies possess two black holes at their center. These black holes seems to have a relative motion to each other, similar to those observe in particle physics.

http://www.jannalevin.com/science.html

See "Through the wormhole", "The Riddle of black holes" episode.

The second observation is that according to the most recent computed models for a star going supernova (hypernova),  the explosion is still unexplained. All models finish in the total mass going into the generated black hole.

http://iopscience.iop.org/1742-6596/180/1/012022/pdf/1742-6596_180_1_012022.pdf


The third observation is a theoretical one. According to the Holographic Principle, some kind of holographic image of everything going inside a black hole should be stored in 2D at the event horizon (for the conservation of information).

With these three observations in mind and that the elementary particle is the photon, it seems that a black hole should be a multiple wavelengths (or photons) particle. For a symmetry reason, all wavelengths should be of the same length, the Planck wavelength. In a supernova, the first black holes should appear from single particles collapsing around the center of the star. They should collapse to a particle of a size 2πR=2πLp=ʎp (for a circle approximation). If all photons collapse into a single particle of this size, there will be no explosion, only an implosion and nothing will be left.  The photons (or any way you want to call it) collapsing will connect into a ring that , when enlarging, will cause the explosion of the supernova.

The Planck Length = 1.616 x 10-35 m

ʎp = 2πLp = 1.0154 x 10^-34

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/planck/node2.html

Supposing the quantization is based on a minimal wavelength λp = 2πLp.

A circular black hole having a circumference of N*ʎp and a mass m, will have an energy of

E = mC2 = N * h * C / ʎp

For N = 1,
m = Mp = 2.1916 x 10^-8 kg (Planck mass)

R = N * ʎp / 2π
Where N = m / Mp
R =(m/Mp) * (ʎp / 2π)
R = m * 7.374 x 10^-28

For a one solar mass black hole,
R = 1466.6 m, in comparison, the Schwarszchild radius is twice as large at about 2951 m.

For the black hole at the center of the Milky Way, evaluated to approximately 4 million solar masses,
R = 5.867 * 10^9 m or a diameter of 1.173 x 10^7 km.

Again in comparison, the Schwarszchild radius is about 1.18 x 10^7 km, twice as large.

For a sphere made with this kind of rotating wave at a speed of C, the simplest solution is
R(sphere) = R (circle) / √2
For a diameter of about 0.929 x 10^7 km

Validation:

At the event horizon, all particles are transferred into light and travel at the speed of light. At the speed of light, there is no relativity. Once a photon has reach the event horizon, there is no relative movement... Before and after, equations must have a continuity... Relativistic energy due to gravity is perpendicular to the ring and it is reciprocal for both the particles and blackhole, so it just vanishes... (in gamma ray burst)

F = GM1M2/R^2 = M2 * a

Where
G is the Gravitational constant
M1 is the black hole mass
M2 is the mass of the particle
R is the radius of the event horizon or the size of the black hole
a is the radial acceleration of the particle as a photon rotating at the event horizon and is equal to v^2/R = C^2/R.

=>  GM1/R^2 = C^2/R

=> G/C^2 = R/M1

R = GM1/C^2 (or half the traditional Schwarszchild radius)

Thus a prediction of maximum event horizons sizes of half the sizes of the Schwarszchild radius.

The black ring is made of two concentric rings separated by the Planck length. The rings are made of multiple photons, each having two wavelengths of 2pi*Lp, one wavelength inside and one outside. There is no gravity in the middle.

If the Big Bang was the breaking of a black hole, the space in the middle of the ring(s) would look like a faster than light expansion from the point of view of the actual Big Bang Theory...
« Last Edit: 03/11/2014 08:56:40 by CPT ArkAngel »
 

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 584
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #89 on: 13/12/2010 06:23:11 »
What happen if two black holes become concentric? The more massive black hole is the outer one. If the black hole inside is large enough you will have a BigBang and two concentric halos in the background radiation (WMAP)!!!

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=no-evidence-of-time-before-big
« Last Edit: 14/12/2010 05:06:09 by CPT ArkAngel »
 

Offline JP

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3366
  • Thanked: 2 times
    • View Profile
Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #90 on: 13/12/2010 08:13:35 »
What happen if two black holes become concentric? The more massive black hole is the outer one. If the black hole inside is large enough you will have a BigBang and two concentric halos in the background radiation (WMAPS)!!!

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=no-evidence-of-time-before-big

Um... that article has nothing to do with two concentric black holes causing big bangs...
 

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 584
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #91 on: 13/12/2010 17:49:25 »
No, but they confirm concentric halos in the WMAPS.

Where do you see a true explanation?

The standard model of the Bigbang is a fairy tale...

The more people will study the WMAP, the more people will find the flaws of this fairy tale...


http://arxiv.org/abs/1012.1486

http://www.physorg.com/news154627589.html

To be correct, i must say that the fairy tale end, somehow, with the end of the faster than light inflation...

http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/media/060915/060915_CMB_Timeline150.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_singularity
!!!
« Last Edit: 17/12/2010 03:16:00 by CPT ArkAngel »
 

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 584
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #92 on: 30/12/2010 01:36:22 »
According to Relativity, any observer in an inertial frame of reference will measure the speed C for all vector components of a beam of light. According to my theory, gravity and time are the same. Time is propagating at the speed of light, so light always has a zero timerate. Photons have different time but they always have a zero timerate.

For a black hole, light at the event horizon is rotating at a maximum curvature of spacetime for a maximum energy density. For an outside observer, the energy is the same as the energy of a particle, E=MC^2. For a photon at the EH (event horizon), there is no mass and the energy of the black hole is E=NhC/λ. Light at the EH has to be the source of gravity and time. It is the source of the spacetime curvature...
« Last Edit: 10/01/2011 17:48:49 by CPT ArkAngel »
 

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 584
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #93 on: 09/01/2011 06:05:23 »
Supposing an electric charge has always a size of the Planck Length and supposing the mass (and gravity) of any particles including black holes is produced by the charges, I have just found the solution to a unification theory... A black hole must have many charges to produce a stronger gravitation field than a minimal black hole of r=Lp and m=mp. So a black hole is not a singularity but grows with its mass... The total charge may be zero but the charges are still there...

α*G*Mp^2 = e^2/(4πξ0) = α*h*C/2π

where α is the coupling constant = 1/137
and e is the elementary charge.

Later this week i will post more explanations about how i got there and how it agrees with my theory.
« Last Edit: 09/01/2011 06:07:45 by CPT ArkAngel »
 

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 584
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #94 on: 15/01/2011 03:23:11 »
Quantum entanglement explanation:

When two photons, having parallel polarization and a relative energy in a quantization range of a pair of elementary particle-antiparticle, exist in the same space (to be determined) but 180 degrees out of phase to each other, they create a pair of particle-antiparticle. These particles are made of half of each photons and have half the charge from both of them. For the particles, gravity and timerate appear from their own creation... Both particles are created simultaneously. This is just a model because curvature of spacetime maybe necessary. (According to the conservation of momentum, the photons have to travel in opposite directions for particles to be created.)

From its creation to its rebirth as being half of both particle and antiparticle, a photon travels in no timerate. For the photon, it existed from its origin A to its destination B in no time and thus had a length dimension from A to B in space.

The lightwave rotating around a particle never stopped moving at the speed of light and it is thus still linked to its origin A in no time... It is its spin...

The spatial polarization of photons is directly related to their spins and is unlimited in velocity, but it is limited in reach only by their mass energy quanta in specific spacetime coordinates. Again, a strong relation between time and gravity...

It means there is non local hidden variables. For two entangled photons, at their creation, they both have a dissociative common and dependent variable about their spin.

My theory says that the BigBang was produced by one or two unstable blackholes. A blackhole is a particle of multiple wavelengths Nλp. Thus, all energy of our Universe was once entangled!!! It does not violate causality in anyway. It just means we need to know all spins and their relations in the Universe to have a 100% certitude prediction. This is entropy growing... This data seems to be unreachable but the system itself may still be causal... There is still the possibility that Biological entities may input undeterministic data to a causal and mechanical system... More dimensions...?


Pilot wave theory:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Broglie%E2%80%93Bohm_theory

experimental evidence:
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/46193
« Last Edit: 10/06/2011 05:29:47 by CPT ArkAngel »
 

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 584
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #95 on: 07/02/2011 03:01:12 »
According to the Kaluza-Klein Theory, the charge is a fifth dimension. If the photons are made of charges (but having a total of zero), time and gravity can be an effect of the charges going at a slower speed than the speed of light. All particles have charges, even the neutron. So all particles have their own referential clock associated to their charge. The charge has a radial dimension of the Planck Length. This is my assumptions. Dark Matter particles must have a total charge of zero, but the charges do not vanish; they still interact by creating a gravitational field.

General Relativity equations are not valid for sizes smaller than the Planck Length and it doesn't explain what happen to the electromagnetic and nuclear forces beyond that in a black hole... Here is the link between Relativity and Quantum Theory...

α*G*Mp^2 = e^2/(4πξ0) = α*h*C/2π = α*Mp*C^2*Lp

Where the first term contains the gravitational angular momentum, the second term contains the electrical potential angular momentum and the third term is the space time geometry (subscript p is for Planck).

The gravitational lightwave angular momentum of a rotating photon at a radius of the Planck Length is

G*Mp^2/C = h/2π = Mp*C*Lp

This equation is valid for all elementary particles:

G*Mp^2/C = h/2π = M*C*R

from E = M*C^2 = h*ν = h*C/λ

Where
M is the particle's mass,
R is the particle's radius.

Erratum: A charge always propagates at the speed of light. 6/03/2011
« Last Edit: 05/07/2011 20:53:08 by CPT ArkAngel »
 

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 584
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #96 on: 09/02/2011 09:09:33 »
An electric charge travelling at the speed of light (as a photon) is in the fifth dimension, but not interacting with the dimension of time. Is the charge really going at the speed of light? Is it really in the dimension of space? For now, we can only say that it appears to travel at the speed of light and thus in space, according to what we see from its interactions with matter.

The Doppler effect on the frequency of a photon, ascending or descending a gravitational field, is caused by the specific rate of the referential clock of the particle it will interact with... So, if it interacts with a particle in a strong gravitational field, its frequency will be higher than if it interacts with a particle in a low gravitational field, due to the slower rate of the particle's referential clock...


http://vixra.org/pdf/1012.0006v2.pdf

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/gr-qc/pdf/9909/9909014v1.pdf
« Last Edit: 16/02/2011 07:11:17 by CPT ArkAngel »
 

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 584
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #97 on: 17/02/2011 05:40:54 »
Special Relativity and Equivalence Principle

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivalence_principle

According to Special Relativity, and it has been proved,

The Lorentz contraction formula is

L' = L/γ = L*√(1-v^2/C^2)

where γ = 1/√(1-v^2/C^2)

According to my theory, a length contraction will decrease the radius of the particle by the same amount. If its radius decrease, its mass will increase:


the gravitational lightwave angular momentum of an elementary particle at rest is given by

M*C*R = h/2π = G*Mp^2/C

For a moving particle along the x axis,

Mx'*C*Rx' = γ*Mx*C*Rx/γ = h/2π

Its gravitational lightwave angular momentum is unaffected by relativity. It shows that, it is, in someway, more fundamental than Relativity.

The photon rotating at a radius R', for a relativistic observer, generates a true mass of M'. Thus, the inertial mass should be considered to be equivalent to its gravitational mass. It is a generalisation, because they both have a different cause, as understood until now. According to my theory, they are both created by the rotation of a photon at a radius having a corresponding mass. The true gravitational mass depends entirely on the relativity of movement and the rest mass, it is thus the same as inertial mass. Einstein was right after all...

Last, I just want you to pay attention to the fact that timerate has the same "dilatation" or increase as mass and gravity...

« Last Edit: 05/07/2011 20:53:49 by CPT ArkAngel »
 

Offline williampcochran

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 25
    • View Profile
Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #98 on: 22/02/2011 14:17:42 »
Ark Angel, i have been following your post with much interest. you truly are a genius...
 

Offline Phractality

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 523
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • View Profile
Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #99 on: 22/02/2011 21:41:21 »
I agree that what we can see of the universe is entirely made up of photons. Well, not exactly photons, but ethereal shear waves; a photon is a special kind of ethereal shear wave, and all ethereal shear waves propagate at the speed of light.

It is difficult for me to answer this question fully without explaining my whole Fractal Foam Model of Universes. One element of the model is like a solitary piece of a jigsaw puzzle. It makes no sense out of context. Nevertheless, I shall try to stay on point.

In my model:

Particles are made of orbiting pairs (or groups) of ethereal shear waves, which orbit one another at the speed of light. A photon is an ethereal shear wave which obeys the formula E = hc/λ. A photon having the energy equivalent of an electron's mass has a wavelength, λ, about 1000 times longer than the classical radius of an electron. So the shear waves that orbit one another to form an electron must have wavelengths at least 1000 times shorter than photons of the same energy. In fact, some claim to have established upper limits on the size of the electron as small as 10^-22 m, which is about 10,000,000 times smaller than the classical radius. So the shear waves that orbit one another to form particles are not, strictly speaking, photons.

Everything in our universe consists of ethereal shear waves (regular energy) and ethereal pressure waves (dark energy). All the forces of nature result from exchange of momentum between the two types of waves. The mix of shear waves and pressure waves is chaotic, and each species of particle is a strange attractor. The rest mass of the particle is energy-mass of the orbiting shear waves.

Yes, a photon has mass IN EUCLIDEAN SPACE. I must digress to explain why photons have no mass in Minkowski space-time. This truth is sadly missing from you classical education, and it may seem to contradict what you think you know. Try to see this as clarification, rather than contradiction.

In Euclidean space, there is mutual attraction between photons and other masses by the force of gravity. The formula, f = ma, doesn't work at relativistic speeds for particles with rest mass, let alone for photons. The correct formula for both is f = dp/dt; force is the rate of change of momentum. (For a rest mass, dp = mdv + vdm.) If the force of gravity is not parallel to the path of the photon, then the photon will change direction and follow a curved path.

In Minkowski space-time, the path of a photon is the definition of a straight line. Straightening the path of light by definition is the cause of the warp of space-time. The warp is caused by gravity, not the other way around. Minkowski's redefinition of a straight line tacitly alters the meanings of all the familiar parameters, including mass. This is why it is said that a photon has no mass; they’re not telling you that this is only true in Minkowski space-time. If you ask about Euclidean space, they tell you that Euclidean space does not exist in a gravity field. If you believe in Euclidean space, as I do, they treat you like a Flat-Earther.
« Last Edit: 23/02/2011 02:45:43 by Phractality »
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #99 on: 22/02/2011 21:41:21 »

 

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