Jurg— I am continuing to study your papers regarding SO(4) physics. The latest is your item on ResearchGate “Nuclear & Particle Physics version 2.0 < SO(4) physics > Main achievements” of September, 2019.
Some questions and comments follow: 1. In the introduction and throughout the detailed sections you refer to rotations of a something. It seems that the rotating entity is a real charge of a certain magnitude relative to classical physical constants. Is this what the SO(4) modeling assumes? 2. Also in the introduction you indicate: “ A uniform time axis is a mathematical trick that allows us to model events that change the relation between an old and a new state in a regular fashion. But from the more fundamental information theory we know that there is no global time and we can only model phenomena that are based on a partial order of events.” I would infer that time is a virtual concept—not a real dimension. Is this a correct inference? 3. The Introduction refers to various references for background theory and other references are made throughout the paper. A list of references is desirable. 4. The NPP2.0 seems to include 3 real space dimensions and up to 3 more dimensions. Are these additional dimensions described by a continuous numerical scale or an eigenvalue or finite element space dimension or some other measure? 5. Most of the constants NPP2.0 includes involve time and distance. If time is not a global dimension, then it seems the constants are nothing more than virtual (not real) ideas. Bob ----------------------------------------- From: Jürg Wyttenbach<mailto:[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, January 8, 2020 12:31 PM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mystery Hiding Inside Every Atom The quark picture of SM is bare nonsense as nobody ever could measure a mass of any quark better than two bits what is nothing. Quarks are not particles rather resonances of a complex wave ensemble that forms e.g. the proton. All reasoning using standard model is a dead end as even the math is provable incomplete - not able to correctly handle a three body problem. The article you reference already in the first sentence presents provable nonsense, as we know today that a proton & neutron is not bound by the strong force. This only starts after 4-He! and only holds for the nuclear core mass. I recommend to read into the SO(4) model : https://www.researchgate.net/project/Nuclear-and-particle-physics-20 The structure of the nucleus is much more complex than SM thinks and on the other side much simpler to handle if you understand the correct physics behind mass. SO(4) physics gives the correct internal structure of a proton/neutron and shows how you e.g. get the correct gamma lines of 6-Li a simple enough nucleus. (This is not in the summary!) J.W. Am 08.01.20 um 18:14 schrieb H LV: There's a Giant Mystery Hiding Inside Every Atom in the Universe By Rafi Letzter - Staff Writer No one really knows what happens inside an atom. But two competing groups of scientists think they've figured it out. And both are racing to prove that their own vision is correct. Here's what we know for sure: Electrons whiz around "orbitals" in an atom's outer shell. Then there's a whole lot of empty space. And then, right in the center of that space, there's a tiny nucleus — a dense knot of protons and neutrons that give the atom most of its mass. Those protons and neutrons cluster together, bound by what's called the strong force. And the numbers of those protons and neutrons determine whether the atom is iron or oxygen or xenon, and whether it's radioactive or stable. Still, no one knows how those protons and neutrons (together known as nucleons) behave inside an atom. Outside an atom, protons and neutrons have definite sizes and shapes. Each of them is made up of three smaller particles called quarks, and the interactions between those quarks are so intense that no external force should be able to deform them, not even the powerful forces between particles in a nucleus. But for decades, researchers have known that the theory is in some way wrong. Experiments have shown that, inside a nucleus, protons and neutrons appear much larger than they should be. Physicists have developed two competing theories that try to explain that weird mismatch, and the proponents of each are quite certain the other is incorrect. Both camps agree, however, that whatever the correct answer is, it must come from a field beyond their own.... https://www.livescience.com/mystery-of-proton-neutron-behavior-in-nucleus.html?fbclid=IwAR0IlQmBawS5EkgkaXxl9SET0bExL-su9Yt3dETNlsea0G9AfWzLV7-7OHQ -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr.22 8910 Affoltern a.A. 044 760 14 18 079 246 36 06
