To answer your question: A neutrino photon is a neutrino entron traveling in a circle at a speed of 2c and forward at a speed of c; just like every other photon is an entron traveling in a circle at a speed of 2c and forward at a speed of c.
The electrons, positrons, protons alpha particles are just as stable in my model as in yours. The difference is I have a simple explanation of their internal structures using only one particle and its anti-particle (the plus e and minus e tronnies). -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Russell Standish Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2014 6:55 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: TRONNIES On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 06:18:47PM -0700, John Ross wrote: > Thanks for the comment. I make the same offer to you that I just made to Russsel. > > > > I must say however that I am not aware of any portion of my theory that is at odds with observation. I know that it is greatly at odds with existing theories. > > > Yes, I understand it has to be compared with experiment, not theory. That is why I pointed to lepton number conservation, which is an empirically observed law of physics. Another law is conservation of baryon number. If baryon number is not conserved, then protons become unstable. Empirically, the proton half life is more than 10^{33} years. Ie - as far as we know, protons are utterly stable, and baryon number is conserved, contradicting certain Grand Unified Theories which predicted the opposite. Conservation of lepton number also leads to infinite lifetimes of the electron and neutrino (as well as the muon/tauon counterparts), so any departure from conservation would imply instability of those particles. Electrons and positrons have lepton number 1, and baryon number 0. More precisely, there are 3 lepton numbers, and it's the 'e' lepton number that is 1, the other two (mu and tau) being irrelevant to this discussion. Photons have both zero lepton and baryon number. If a proton is just made up of an electron, positron and a photon, the proton's lepton number is 1 and it's baryon number zero - in contrast with empirical results. The question I have - how does a "neutrino entron" differ from a "neutrino photon", which is just a photon as you state. The truth is I'm not interested enough in this topic to explore your theory. So I'm declining your suggestion to go read you book. But it is clear that your theory needs to satisfy all the known empirically observed conservation laws, or place tight bounds on any departures from them, in order for your theory to get off the ground. So far, it seems it has flunked energy conservation (John Clark's post), momentum conservation, lepton and baryon number conservation. We haven't heard a satisfactory response from you to any of these problems. And we haven't even started applying things like CPT symmetry. Cheers -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics [email protected] University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au Latest project: The Amoeba's Secret (http://www.hpcoders.com.au/AmoebasSecret.html) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- 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 [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. 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 [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
