You haven't answered my main question. Is the 2-tronnie system classical, in which case my next question is how does it avoid instability? Or is it quantised, and in its ground state? (in which case I agree that there is no energy to radiate).
On 21 May 2014 13:09, John Ross <jr...@trexenterprises.com> wrote: > My understanding is that positronium is an electron and a positron > orbiting together. Both of these particles are self-propelled so as long > as they have enough speed they can orbit. If they somehow lose their > speeds or otherwise get very close together they will annihilate each other > and gamma rays will be released. (A neutrino photon will also be released > according to my theory.) Entrons on the other hand are extremely stable. > Each one is one plus tronnie and one minus tronnie, each self propelled in > the same circle at pi/2 times the speed of light by their combined > attractive and repulsive Coulomb forces. They don’t radiate energy because > they have no energy to radiate. There is one entron in each photon. > Photons from faraway galaxies travel billions of years to earth. Some are > absorbed in astronomer’s eyes, as they gaze at the galaxy, as visible light > entrons to provide a small amount of energy to an electron or maybe a > proton in the astronomer’s retina. > > > > The Coulomb force between the two tronnies in the entron, if they were > stationary would be F = k QQ/r squared. But when we integrate the force > around the circle the integrated force becomes F(I) = k QQ/r. The > attractive and repulsive *integrated forces* in the diametrical are > exactly equal. I do the math to prove this in Chapter VI (page 50). This > is the most important feature of my model of our Universe. It almost seems > unreal to me sometimes that these two charges of plus e and minus e can be > as close as 0.9339 X 10-18 m to each other for billions of years and remain > stable. If the tronnies were stationary and that close the force between > them would be 256 million newtons (about 29 thousand tons)! But they are > not stationary, they are traveling faster than the speed of light in this > tiny circle. This also sounds unbelievable. This is probably why no one > has in the past proposed my solution. > > > > But we know science presents some strange things. I am working of a > patent application right now dealing with frequency tripling where a 1064 > nm photon is combined with a 532 nm photon to produce a 355 nm photon laser > beam. I think this is equally amazing, but these lasers have been of the > market for quite a few years. > > > > John R > > > > *From:* everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto: > everything-list@googlegroups.com] *On Behalf Of *LizR > *Sent:* Tuesday, May 20, 2014 3:30 PM > > *To:* everything-list@googlegroups.com > *Subject:* Re: TRONNIES > > > > I haven't got much further as yet, so I'm not sure that there will be > daily comments. However I did notice that one of your basic units is an e+ > and an e- charged particle orbitting each other, which looks to me rather > like positronium <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positronium> (except that > I believe tronnies are massless.) > > Are you OK with quantum physics? (I have a feeling you aren't) If not, I > suspect that this 2-tronnie system will be unstable against small > perturbations. (If the system is quantised, then it's possible that there > are only certain allowed energy states, so it can't be perturbed by small > influences.) Note that even in our (believed to be quantised) universe, > positronium decays very quickly into gamme rays. > > Also, with two accelerating charges (circular motion is acceleration as > I'm sure you know), I think they should be emitting radiation, which will > also destabilise the system, leading the components to lose angular > momentum and collapse to a single point. This would happen inside an > atom,except that quantum physics disallows it - but it does so by > postulating that electrons are in fact waves, and that only a whole number > of wavelengths can fit within the space allowed by each orbital. I don't > see how this can be true of your point particles, so how do you overcome > what was called "the ultraviolet catastrophe" - the collapse of matter in a > burst of radiation? > > > > > > On 21 May 2014 04:13, John Ross <jr...@trexenterprises.com> wrote: > > I look forward to your comments each day. And I try to respond the best I > can. > > > > *From:* everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto: > everything-list@googlegroups.com] *On Behalf Of *LizR > *Sent:* Monday, May 19, 2014 4:37 PM > > > *To:* everything-list@googlegroups.com > *Subject:* Re: TRONNIES > > > > On 20 May 2014 11:17, John Ross <jr...@trexenterprises.com> wrote: > > I don’t smoke, but I did not expect a cigar anyway. > > > > I *believe* Chapter I is a fair assessment of current scientific > thinking. (If I honestly believe something but am not certain of, I > *believe* use of the phrase “I believe “ is appropriate.) Many scientist > are skeptical of many features of the standard model and relativity, > including one of your heroes, Richard Feynman. > > > > You have given an overly negative picture. You haven't attempted to > explain what the achievements of science were in the 20th dentury, but have > dismissed most of them as "hard to understand" as though this is a bad > thing (as I pointed out in an earlier post, the chances are against the > parts of the universe we didn't evolve to cope with being easy for us to > understand). The fact that scientists are sceptical of various features of > a theory does not invalidate the entire thing (anti-evolutionists often > point to minor quibbles about the details of the theory as though they > undermined the whole thing...) Einstein was famously sceptical of the > claims of quantum physics, but he explained why in detail, in for example > the famous EPR paper. (He didn't just say "That Neils Bohr, he just doesn't > understand quantum theory" or something similar.) > > > > Chapter II is just a summary of my thinking. Details will come. > > > > I don't want details so much as the reasoning behind this model. > > > > Thanks for giving it your attention. I really appreciate it. > > > > I would appreciate the same attention being given to all the points I and > others have raised. > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
