Archive for October, 2013

Table of nuclides: An explanation of the nuclides from Hydrogen to Neon

This application of the Cordus theory offers a descriptive solution for the relative lifetimes of all the nuclides of Hydrogen to Neon.

Cordus theory for Table of Nuclides

Cordus theory for Table of Nuclides

More specifically, the theory is able to explain why any one nuclide is stable, unstable, or non-existent. Consequently the theory also explains the drip lines, which are the margins of stability to the table of nuclides. It also explains the gaps in the series and sudden changes in stability across a series. This is achieved by identifying a unique set of rules -a mechanics- for the nuclear polymer. This is based, as with all the rest of the Cordus theory, on a non-local hidden-variable (NLHV) design.

The chart of the nuclides as per the Cordus theory is shown below.

Table of Nuclides (PDF file)

This is a large diagram and may look blank: you will need to pan and zoom to see it. The paper containing this diagram has been submitted to a journal for peer-review. A copy is available on the vixra physics archive.

This theory also explains several other trends in the table of nuclides, which we may discuss another time. Other theories, including quantum chromodynamics (QCD), binding energy, shell model, liquid drop model, and semi-empirical mass formula (SEMF) can explain some of the features of the table of nuclides, but tend to be limited to mathematical representations of binding energy, with little real explanatory power. In contrast this Cordus theory offers explanations where these other theories are at a loss.

So it appears that the nuclide landscape may be explained by morphological considerations based on a NLHV design.

, , , , , ,

Leave a comment

Explaining the Nuclides

HI! He Lithely Bellowed Boringly, Car Nicely On Fire Nearby.

The first ten elements take us from Hydrogen to Neon. However they have many nuclides, about 140. (Nuclides, or isotopes, are nucleus variants with different numbers of neutrons).

There are many unsolved problems in this area. How are the protons and neutrons arranged in the nucleus? What makes some combinations of protons and neutrons stable, and others not? Why do the series start and stop where they do? How does the strong force bind protons and neutrons in nuclear structures? How do point particles make up a nucleus with volume?

All this continues to be a mystery, a century after Rutherford’s discovery of the nucleus. Current theories for this area, e.g. magic numbers, QCD, and the SEMF, don’t have answers, despite having working at the problem for half a century or more.

The whole thing needs a total re-think at the fundamental level, and we propose starting with what it means to be a ‘particle’.  Quantum mechanics (QM) is built on the assumption that particles are zero-dimensional points. What if quantum mechanics was wrong? What are the alternatives?

One option is to assume that particles really do have internal structures. This is called a hidden-variable solution.  However trying to find a workable version has been an insurmountable difficulty, and most people in physics have given up trying. We have had some success in this, in the form of the Cordus theory. This is a non-local hidden-variable (NLHV) design. Even so, explaining the nuclides from first principles, whether with QM or a NLHV design, is a formidable task that has not been solved.

Consequently, we plan to approach it in stages. Here’s where we have got to:

STAGE A: Create a theory for how the strong force works. [DONE] In the Cordus theory this corresponds to a synchronous interaction. As a bonus, we also get force unification. Read the journal paper here http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/apr.v5n5107

STAGE B: Elucidate how the synchronous interaction applies to proton and neutrons. [DONE] Surprisingly, it turns out that there are two versions, not just one, of the this force. We worked out how this would affect the bonding of protons and neutrons. This gave us an explanation  of what the neutron is doing in the nucleus. As a bonus, we also got the nuclear structures of the hydrogen nuclides. And as a further bonus, we were able to explain why both 1H0 and 1H1 are stable. So that is ‘Hi!’ sorted. Read the preprint here http://viXra.org/abs/1309.0010

STAGE C: Discover how larger collections of protons and neutrons join together. [DONE] Unexpectedly, the theory suggests the protons and neutrons form a nuclear polymer. Generally this is a closed loop. We find the design capable of accepting three-nucleon assemblies, in the form of Bridge neutrons. As a bonus, we find the nuclides of Helium. So that is Hi! ‘He..’ done.   Read the preprint here http://vixra.org/abs/1310.0007

That’s all the progress to report for now.

STAGE D: Predict the nuclide structure. Interpret the trends in the table of nuclides. [WORK IN PROGRESS] H and He are easy nuclides. After this it get tougher. We are working on it and hope to report back shortly.

, , , , , ,

3 Comments

Paper published: Strong force

We just had our paper on the synchronous interaction (strong force) published.  It is titled ‘Synchronous interlocking of discrete forces: Strong force reconceptualised in a NLHV solution’ and is published in Applied Physics Research. It’s available under open access. Follow this DOI link to access the full paper: http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/apr.v5n5107 

Basically the paper proposes that it is much easier to understand the strong force as a synchronisation between nearby particules. The strong force arises because of an interlock between the discrete forces of the two particles. Much like say an electric stepper motor. Hence it is easy to explain why the strong force should drop off outside a certain range. Thus it appears to be repulsive at short range, strong at intermediate range, and weak at long range.

However this solution comes with a cost: one has to abandon quantum mechanics’ idea that particles are 0-D points… this is the unorthodox bit. Nonetheless, it’s entirely plausible that particles could have internal structures, since the only real obstacles are the Bell-type inequalities. These are mathematical rather than empirically validated limitations, and don’t exclude non-local hidden-variable designs anyway.

This theory makes some interesting other predictions along the way.

The conventional requirements for the strong force are that it is strongly attractive between nucleons whether neutral neutrons or positively charged protons; that it is repulsive at close range; that its effect drops off with range. However theories, such as quantum chromodynamics, based on this thinking have failed to explain nucleus structure ab initio starting from the strong force. We apply a systems design approach to this problem. We show that it is more efficient to conceptualise the interaction as interlocking effect, and develop a solution based on a specific non-local hidden-variable design called the Cordus conjecture. We propose that the strong force arises from particules synchronising their emission of discrete forces. This causes the participating particules to be interlocked: the interaction pulls or repels particules into co-location and then holds them there, hence the apparent attractive-repulsive nature of that force and its short range. Those discrete forces are renewed at the de Broglie frequency of the particule. The Cordus theory answers the question of how the strong force attracts the nucleons (nuclear force). We make several novel falsifiable predictions including that there are multiple types of synchronous interaction depending on the phase of the particules, hence cis- and trans-phasic bonding. We also predict that this force only applies to particules in coherent assembly. A useful side effect is that the theory also unifies the strong and electro-magneto-gravitation (EMG) forces, with the weak force having a separate causality.  The synchronous interaction (strong force) is predicted to be intimately linked to coherence, with the EMG forces being the associated discoherent phenomenon. Thus we further predict that there is no need to overcome the electrostatic force in the nucleus, because it is already inoperative when the strong force operates. We suggest that ‘strong’ is an unnecessarily limiting way of thinking about this interaction, and that the ‘synchronous’ concept offers a more parsimonious solution with greater explanatory power for fundamental physics generally, and the potential to  explain nuclear mechanics.

Pons, D. J., Pons, A. D., & Pons, A. J. (2013). Synchronous interlocking of discrete forces: Strong force reconceptualised in a NLHV solution  Applied Physics Research, 5(5), 107-126. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/apr.v5n5107

Leave a comment

Why

A New Scientist article ‘Why space has exactly three dimensions’ by Matthew Chalmers raises the ontological question of why 3-D, as opposed to something else. The article goes on to show that mathematical representations of quantum mechanics work best with three.

Our own Cordus work also provides circumstantial evidence for space having three dimensions. This arises from the requirement for particules to emit discrete forces in three directions.

Our response to the article follows:

Coming at it from a completely different direction, namely applying the design method to a non-local hidden-variable (NLHV) solution, we also find things work out when there are three dimensions to space. In this case explaining string theory is not a big problem, because it happens that we need about the same number of internal variables to define the NLHV design, as are needed in string theory (http://vixra.org/abs/1204.0047). Entanglement and wave-particle duality are readily explained (http://physicsessays.org/doi/abs/10.4006/0836-1398-25.1.132). Obtaining unification of the electro-magneto-gravitational-strong interactions is also conceptually achievable with NLHV solutions (http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/apr.v5n5107). As a plus, it also gives a theory for time, and thereby addresses not only space but spacetime too (accepted, preprint http://vixra.org/abs/1301.0074). (Spoiler: time becomes an emergent property of matter in this theory).

I wouldn’t claim we have really addressed the deeper ontological question of why three dimensions. But we can at least show that three gives a robust and coherent NLHV solution that explains many difficult areas in fundamental physics. See Cordus on vixra for details.

 

Reference

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21929360.700-why-space-has-exactly-three-dimensions.html

, , ,

Leave a comment