This is a follow up post to the thread
RE: Proton radius in question, after 3 years the textbooks may need to be
corrected...
A new paper addresses the charge radius of muonic hydrogen
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/15/science/physicists-see-higgs-boson-in-new-particle-but-more-study-is-needed.html
CERN Physicists See Higgs Boson in New Particle
By DENNIS OVERBYE
Physicists at CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research, said
Thursday that the new particle discovered
I would posit that spin is the phase relationship of the oscillations...
-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, March 11, 2013 2:35 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:RE: Proton radius in question, after 3 years the textbooks
may need
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 11:50 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net wrote:
I would posit that spin is the phase relationship of the oscillations...
Robin has not enthusiastically jumped in to explain. ;-)
negative spin is a political orientation
On Tuesday, March 12, 2013, Terry Blanton wrote:
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 11:50 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint
zeropo...@charter.netjavascript:;
wrote:
I would posit that spin is the phase relationship of the oscillations...
Robin has not enthusiastically
In reply to ChemE Stewart's message of Tue, 12 Mar 2013 12:00:59 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
negative spin is a political orientation
Definitely the most amusing response! :)
On Tuesday, March 12, 2013, Terry Blanton wrote:
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 11:50 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint
In reply to MarkI-ZeroPoint's message of Tue, 12 Mar 2013 08:50:56 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
I would posit that spin is the phase relationship of the oscillations...
-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, March 11, 2013 2:35 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
-Original Message-
From: mix...@bigpond.com in reply to Terry Blanton's message:
The idea is that the ZPE is the provider of *all* mass to all things.
Is this an elaboration of or a replacement for the Higgs field?
I don't think Higgs is a requirement for the Puthoff theory.
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 11:27 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
Hmm ... don't be so quick to write Puthoff off wrt Higgs. It may not have
been a former requirement but things change.
Well, we don't yet have a five sigma horse to put before the cart yet.
The alleged Higgs might have a
The Higgs is getting ahead of the horse. Just because a particle within this
mass range has been discovered does not prove that it is a special one.
Perhaps someone should show that the discovery actually performs a function
before they jump too high and far. I have to be skeptical in this
A cynic would say that there has been a value floating around, almost as a
meme. maybe for 30 years, and this value keeps coming up in models, and is
hinted at in beam-line data from time to time, and its getting more and more
precise over time - but it is a high value and the means to see it have
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 1:34 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
Let’s say the historic “value” is/was abound 125 GeV.
I'm glad you find value in their value; but, there are two values
involved (although some might say spin zero is a non value.) They
have not yet determined the spin of
why doesn't anyone ask about the origin of energy?
Harry
Well, since it is a boson, in Vegas the smart money sez it is an integer
which excludes 0.
Seriously, all elementary particles which are thought of as carrying forces
are said to be spin-1. Is there any reason to suspect otherwise?
An interesting question is - if a particle exists in all
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 2:01 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
Well, since it is a boson, in Vegas the smart money sez it is an integer
which excludes 0.
But, grasshopper, to be Higgs, it's mass, color and spin must all be zero:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_boson
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 3:02 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 2:01 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
Well, since it is a boson, in Vegas the smart money sez it is an integer
which excludes 0.
But, grasshopper, to be Higgs, it's mass, color and spin
Well this is obviously above my pay scale. How is spin conserved when the
particle is formed from the collision of 2 protons?
Silly me, I forgot that 1/2 plus 1/2 equals zero when you can throw 9 zero$
at it.
-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton
Well, since it is a boson, in Vegas
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Mon, 11 Mar 2013 12:43:43 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
Well this is obviously above my pay scale. How is spin conserved when the
particle is formed from the collision of 2 protons?
Silly me, I forgot that 1/2 plus 1/2 equals zero when you can throw 9 zero$
at it.
How
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 4:14 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
How about +1/2 + -1/2 = 0?
Is negative spin spatial orientation?
In the current view of things, it’s not the ZPE, it’s the Higgs field that
produces mass. How does the Higgs field and gravity interact, and general
relativity, energy, not to mention the other force carriers?
Here is one opinion
http://www.spacetime-model.com/higgsboson/index.htm
Does anybody
Mathematically and historically the concept of inertia (mass)
preceeded the concept of energy.
Energy is a secondary concept because it is built on the primary
concept of inertia. It would seem most theoretical physicists are
ignorant about the conceptual history of their own subject.
The answer
In reply to Eric Walker's message of Sat, 9 Mar 2013 23:10:56 -0800:
Hi,
[snip]
I take it that the proposed interaction with the ZPE adds mass to the
exposed nucleons and doesn't to the shielded ones? What is the possible
mechanism involved here? Is there a name for the proposal?
Does the ZPE
-Original Message-
From: mix...@bigpond.com in reply to Eric Walker's message:
I take it that the proposed interaction with the ZPE adds mass to the
exposed nucleons and doesn't to the shielded ones? What is the possible
mechanism involved here? Is there a name for the proposal?
Does
On Mar 10, 2013, at 13:30, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
The idea is that the ZPE is the provider of *all* mass to all things.
Is this an elaboration of or a replacement for the Higgs field?
Eric
On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 10:08 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mar 10, 2013, at 13:30, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
The idea is that the ZPE is the provider of *all* mass to all things.
Is this an elaboration of or a replacement for the Higgs field?
I don't think Higgs is a
In reply to Terry Blanton's message of Sun, 10 Mar 2013 22:12:51 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 10:08 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mar 10, 2013, at 13:30, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
The idea is that the ZPE is the provider of *all* mass to all things.
Is this an
In reply to Eric Walker's message of Fri, 1 Mar 2013 22:29:00 -0800:
Hi,
There is also the possibility that the mass of the particle actually derives
form it's interaction with the ZPE, and that when protons and neutrons are
packed closely together, they shield one another to some extent, so
On Sat, Mar 9, 2013 at 5:59 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
There is also the possibility that the mass of the particle actually
derives
form it's interaction with the ZPE, and that when protons and neutrons are
packed closely together, they shield one another to some extent, so that
the
I found the personal interaction between Noyes, Bell and Phipps to be most
revealing.
They obviously had some serious reservations about 'mainstream' physics, the
Copenhagen interpretation, and the prevalence of abstract mathematical
concepts replacing physical entities/concepts in theoretical
On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 2:08 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net wrote:
I found the personal interaction between Noyes, Bell and Phipps to be most
revealing…
Much the sentiment expressed by Crick and Watson after finding the double helix.
From: Eric Walker
Quark mass does not have a value which can be agreed on, so
how can protons?
If I were a betting man, I would bet that the mass of a
proton can change, as well as that of a neutron. The reasoning goes like
this. An atomic nucleus
Whenever I come across something that relates to what some Vorts have an
interest in, I want to bring that info here in case it might help connect
some dots in someone's mind!
Yes, the article was talking radius, not mass which has been your point, but
aren't the two inextricably linked?
Pierre Noyes' work on the combinatorial hierarchy aka bit-string physics
actually appears to have a predicted radius for the proton derived from
pure mathematics. It is related to the Schwartz radius:
What this has led me to is an attempt to reformulate
quantization as resting on
Erratum: Schwartz - Schwarzschild
I guess it was one of God's little jokes to have the man who discovered the
radius of the black hole to be named Karl Schwarzschild.
On Sat, Mar 2, 2013 at 4:25 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:
Pierre Noyes' work on the combinatorial hierarchy aka
I am looking for somebody to explain the higgs mechanism to me in simple
terms. It looks interesting and involves Bose- Einstein condensation,
vacuum energy and superconductivity, localization of electromagnetic field,
and linking of particles to the higgs field.
I am looking for something like
Mark,
I've been focusing on mass variation, not radius - but your point that
textbook values for the other physical properties of protons are almost as
flakey, stands.
Mass of the proton, historically, was measured at different values in
different countries using different techniques, and
I have a question. Really two.
Would it be more likely that a proton could capture a positron than an electron?
Would the result survive as a neutron?
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Fri, 1 Mar 2013 19:27:02 -0800:
Hi,
[snip]
Believe it or not - there is NO model or hypothesis to predict the mass of a
proton! Many in fizzix assume there is, but they are wrong. (there are
dozens of efforts to do this, as in QCD - but none has gotten much
In reply to Terry Blanton's message of Fri, 1 Mar 2013 22:30:12 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
I have a question. Really two.
Would it be more likely that a proton could capture a positron than an
electron?
No, it can't capture a positron at all, because protons and positrons have the
same charge, and
On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 7:27 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
Quark mass does not have a value which can be agreed on, so how can
protons?
If I were a betting man, I would bet that the mass of a proton can change,
as well as that of a neutron. The reasoning goes like this. An
40 matches
Mail list logo
