[talanum1 (OP)]

My definition of particles have gravitrons inside them, so maybe Quantum Gravity will follow from these. See attachments.


Physics from Axioms Advanced.pdf (117.15 kB - downloaded 578 times)

Physics from Axioms clean.pdf (126.31 kB - downloaded 518 times)

These files have errors. See reply 6 and 7 of this post, for the correct versions.

[Kryptid]

Your model suggests that electrons contain gluons. So why don't they interact via the strong force?

[talanum1 (OP)]

So why don't they interact via the strong force?

You would see from the picture that the electron's color charges are paired. So it's color charge cancels out with that of  the gluon.

Thank you for reading my paper, and for the question.

[Kryptid]

You would see from the picture that the electron's color charges are paired.

The color charges "cancel out" in protons and neutrons too. Yet they still interact via the strong force (which is what allows them to form nuclei). So why can't electrons bind to nuclei the way that protons and neutrons can?

[talanum1 (OP)]

I must alter the definition of electrons and anti-neutrinos to leave out the strong charge. Then the result is not as elegant.

See the attachments so altered:


Physics from Axioms clean.pdf (123.57 kB - downloaded 569 times)

Physics from Axioms Advanced.pdf (114.69 kB - downloaded 512 times)

[talanum1 (OP)]

There were grammar errors. See the two corrected attachments:


Physics from Axioms clean.pdf (125.05 kB - downloaded 589 times)

Physics from Axioms Advanced.pdf (115.65 kB - downloaded 608 times)

[talanum1 (OP)]

The formulation was wrong (defining time). Here is the correct version, and a sample computation:


Physics from Axioms clean.pdf (88.61 kB - downloaded 591 times)

physics from axioms calculations.pdf (24.94 kB - downloaded 576 times)

Defining Particles 2.pdf (58.76 kB - downloaded 588 times)

[talanum1 (OP)]

I updated the file: "Defining Particles 2.pdf". I included a proof of the model for electrons. See attachment:


Defining Particles 2.pdf (69.28 kB - downloaded 535 times)

[puppypower]

You would see from the picture that the electron's color charges are paired.

The color charges "cancel out" in protons and neutrons too. Yet they still interact via the strong force (which is what allows them to form nuclei). So why can't electrons bind to nuclei the way that protons and neutrons can?

Positive charge has a greater affinity for mass than does negative charge. This is why the universe ended up with matter instead of anti-matter. Negative charge has more free energy associated with  entropy, while positive charge has more free energy associated with strong force enthalpy, with the free energy the same for both isolated charges.

If we look at any atom, the entropy defined by the electron orbitals is much higher than what is defined by the nucleus orbitals. For the EM force of say the hydrogen atom to be equal and opposite, the positive charge needed to lower free energy in a way, that is less based on entropy and more based on enthalpy. This is connected to the positive charge attached to mass to form the hydrogen proton.

Further lowering of free energy means election orbitals need to increase complexity, while the hydrogen proton becomes ripe for strong force fusion. The election is its own particle, which is why is so dependent on entropy to lower free energy. The positively charged proton is more of a composite state which makes it ripe for further lower of free energy via other composite states, so it can  keep up; match free energy, with the second law driven electrons. 

[Bored chemist]

Positive charge has a greater affinity for mass than does negative charge.

No according to actual measurements.

[Kryptid]

Positive charge has a greater affinity for mass than does negative charge.

No it doesn't.

This is why the universe ended up with matter instead of anti-matter.

Evidence please.

Negative charge has more free energy associated with  entropy, while positive charge has more free energy associated with strong force enthalpy, with the free energy the same for both isolated charges.

Evidence please.

[talanum1 (OP)]

If we look at any atom, the entropy defined by the electron orbitals is much higher than what is defined by the nucleus orbitals. For the EM force of say the hydrogen atom to be equal and opposite, the positive charge needed to lower free energy in a way, that is less based on entropy and more based on enthalpy. This is connected to the positive charge attached to mass to form the hydrogen proton.

Further lowering of free energy means election orbitals need to increase complexity, while the hydrogen proton becomes ripe for strong force fusion. The election is its own particle, which is why is so dependent on entropy to lower free energy. The positively charged proton is more of a composite state which makes it ripe for further lower of free energy via other composite states, so it can  keep up; match free energy, with the second law driven electrons. 

What has this got to do with electrons not having color charge?

Positive charge has a greater affinity for mass than does negative charge. This is why the universe ended up with matter instead of anti-matter. Negative charge has more free energy associated with  entropy, while positive charge has more free energy associated with strong force enthalpy, with the free energy the same for both isolated charges.

Protons certainly have more mass with its positive charge, but there are positrons that also have positive charge but as much mass as an electron.

[Colin2B]

This is why the universe ended up with matter instead of anti-matter.

Evidence please.

Negative charge has more free energy associated with  entropy, while positive charge has more free energy associated with strong force enthalpy, with the free energy the same for both isolated charges.

Evidence please.

Evidence? For something he made up?
You will have a long wait; or more likely a long, meaningless reply.