Apocal.html

APOCALYPTIC PHYSICS

The SKYBOLT^TM technology owes its emergence to a New and Apocalyptic Physics. Physics as a scientific enterprise seeks to come to a knowledge of the universe and foundational to the idea of the existence of such knowledge is the belief that there is ultimately some means to qualitatively evaluate any knowledge which is generated by so-called scientific activities. Implicitly from epistemological considerations is the idea that some knowledge is of a greater quality than others and this stems from the idea that there exists absolute Truth as the ideal. Without the application of reasonable epistemological tests to determine the quality of any knowledge, then knowledge would have no inherent level of quality and one could not discern between pseudo-knowledge and true knowledge. But with Truth as the ideal and logic as a guide and God as the revealer of mysteries one can come to understand the universe.

This new physics has a number of characteristics which distinguish it from mainstream physics.

A) This physics is not based upon the idea of continuous structures or continuum based 'field theory'. See :Potentials

Einstein, in the year before his death expressed grave misgivings about the validity of continuum based physics in a letter to his lifelong friend Michele Besso by writing:

"I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be based on the field concept, i. e., on continuous structures. In that case nothing remains of my entire castle in the air, gravitation theory included, [and of] the rest of modern physics."-
Albert Einstein in a 1954 letter to Besso, quoted from: Subtle is the Lord, Abraham Pais, page 467.

By the time that Einstein began to realize the tremendous intellectual blunder which was at the root and heart of continuum based physics, fully a generation of physicists had spent a great part of their lives articulating and rearticulating the fundamentals of 'field theory' in countless books and journals and academic courses so that the foundations of modern physics were not even considered to be suspect but rather were so axiomatic in nature that it was considered to be evidence that one was 'daft' to seriously raise any question against it. New advances were reckoned not to be legitimately found by questioning the root and foundation of modern physics but only supposedly by extending the theory.

B) This physics is based upon understanding the nature of the most elementary component of the universe to be a discrete velocity potential. And the concept of a discrete velocity potential emerges from the basic idea that all motion is relative coupled together with the notion of the existence of discrete entities known as particles or quanta.

C) This physics utilizes the topology of a torus to express the compact manifold geometry of the universe. It is only in this geometry where physical and mathematical concepts such as curl and divergence (both important aspects of Maxwell's equations) can be fully articulated. This topology provides the vehicle for the full expression of the velocity potential which then allows for the concept of charge to emerge as a function of dynamics and geometry. The unit charge then emerges naturally as a new type of metric (for counting purposes) which is seen to be composed of a finite number (n-1) of velocity potentials in a universe of n particles. In a universe of n particles in a compact manifold of toroidal geometry we see that particles must evolve as charge conjugate pairs, and not as particle anti-particle pairs. We also see that a charged particle pair as a double toroidal structure forms the perfect Archetype of the universe. From this Archetype structure we see the emergence of a complete and final physics.

D) This physics depends upon the reality that Coulomb's Law is, in fact, a 'special case' which describes the interactions of charged particles only when they meet specific criteria. The 'General Case' , which is established by this physics, specifies all charged particle interactions the general expression of which in four simple parts is:

1) "If like charged fundamental particles have a common de Broglie wavelength greater than or equal to the interparticle distance then they will attractively interact."

2) "If unlike charged fundamental particles have a common de Broglie wavelength greater than or equal to the interparticle distance then they will repulsively interact."

3) "If like charged fundamental particles have a common de Broglie wavelength less than the interparticle distance then they will repulsively interact."

4) "If unlike charged fundamental particles have a common de Broglie wavelength less than the interparticle distance then they will attractively interact."

Parts three and four correspond to Coulomb's Law but they are subsumed under the 'General Case' .

This 'General Case' is part of the foundation for a new and Apocalyptic Physics.

Now, first instincts are to rebel at such a 'General Case' until we recognize that it fits the facts for the nuclei of atoms and that it fits the facts for superconduction. Why, we might ask, should a proton be bound to a neutron? The simplest response is that we must first recognize that a neutron is a gravitational source particle, that is, it is a charge and its conjugate in superposition and hence produces a time rate gradient structure the toroidal axis of which is the gravitational terminus of this monolithic gravitational source particle. Elementary charged particles respond to a gravitational source particle but they are not true monolithic gravitational source particles themselves. The gravitational terminus is a low energy state and a quantum axiom is that every quantum particle will obtain to the lowest energy state available. So, protons naturally are obtaining to the lowest energy state available by becoming as co-located as possible with any nearby neutron.

Nature of Inertial Mass

The questions that have long been in men's minds 'Why is the Proton so much more massive than the electron?' and 'What is the origin of this quality that we call inertial mass?' can easily be answered through the application of deductive logic using intuition and data.

Inertial mass is the result of large numbers of like charged quantum particles overlapping in momentum space. It can be shown that when like charged particles are overlapping in momentum space that they behave as if they were strongly attractively interactive. In fact, they are not attractively interactive with respect to each other but pairs of like charged particles that are overlapping in momentum space create a low energy state structure with a sharp gradient. It is as if their combined presence produces a super null energy point, a deep energy hole, so to speak, towards which the pair of like charged particles will both fall in obedience to the quantum axiom that all quantum particles will obtain to the lowest energy state available. Every charged particle is, therefore, falling towards many common null points produced by itself and every other particle of the same sign that is overlapping in momentum space with it. Consider the set n of all particles in the universe where n is the total number of particles in the universe. Consider that there are k sets of j number of particles of the same sign where each set consists of j number of particles that are all overlapping in the same momentum space but that individual particles in any set are not overlapping with particles of another set. This means that there are (k-1)j or jk-j particles that are not overlapping in the same momentum space as any single given particle in any set. We will name the particles of that group of jk-j particles set C and the individual particles in set C can be numbered C₁ through C_jk-j. A null point is produced by the intersection of the vector fields ∇ X H_A and ∇ X H_B that are produced by the pair of particles (that meet the criteria of overlapping in momentum space) with respect to the relative motion of any particle in the set C of particles that has some component of its relative motion with respect to A and B as a normal to any plane that contains both A and B. Consider that there are very many particles in the set C that each of which will have some component of its relative motion with respect to A and B that is a normal to a plane containing both A and B. For each particle in set C that meet that criteria will be produced a pair of vector fields emanating from the apparent locations of A and B from the reference frame of that third particle in the set C of particles. The intersection of those pairs of vector fields which can be numbered ∇ X H_A_{_C₁} and ∇ X H_B_{_C₁} through ∇ X H_A_{_{C_jk-j}} and ∇ X H_B_{_{C_jk-j}} produce a very steep null motion gradient structure towards which the pairs will fall. Consider that each particle is falling towards j-1 such null points each of which from a reference frame or coordinate space of that particle where that particle is at the origin lies in some distinct and unique direction so that the end result is that the particle tends to remain localized with respect to any observer in the same frame. This is equivalent to the particle being pulled in many directions at once with the result being that it does not go easily in any particular direction without substantial changes to its momentum with respect to any observer. This is the nature of inertial mass. If there is some means by which a larger number of one species of charge, say, positively charged particles, can achieve an unbalanced number of particles that are overlapping in the same momentum space with respect to the number of negatively charged particles that are overlapping in the same momentum space, that naturally translates to an immediate inertial mass difference between the two species of charge (as in the mass difference between electrons and protons). Once that inertial mass difference appears then it becomes a global effect because the lower mass particles will always have equal and opposite momenta with respect to the higher mass particles then this state will remain a global condition (throughout the universe). This all comes about considering that a large scale flux loop structure is a time rate gradient structure (monolithic gravitational source) and that it is able to manufacture quantum scale copies of itself (neutrons) that naturally will move towards the gravitational terminus axis (since that terminus is a low energy state location). The decay of that particle into a charge and its conjugate will result in those two overlapping in momentum space and the intersection of the resultant vector fields will produce an energy hill away from which both particles will move. The negatively charge particles end up with low mass and are excluded from the gravitational terminus region. The result is that all the particles that lie along the gravitational terminus axis all occupy or all overlap in the same momentum space while the excluded particles do not so that this just means that the mass difference we detect between protons and electrons is really related to the ratio between the common momentum spaces available to each type of charge. More specifically there are larger numbers of one type of particle (protons) that are overlapping in any one momentum space than there are of the other type. In the cores of stars, which really are standing wave boson structures, we can expect to see the accumulation along the gravitational terminus, which is the toroidal axis of the boson, of nothing but neutrons and protons with the absolute exclusion of electrons. That accumulation of mass I have elsewhere called an Isaacium ring where Isaacium is that super dense matter that because it is void of electrons also cannot emit photons. And note that it is super dense also because it is void of electrons and only has nuclear volume, not atomic volume that can be five or six orders of magnitude greater. This is the very essence of what cosmologists and astrophysicists have called 'heavy dark matter'. I call it Isaacium because 'Isaac' in Hebrew means the laughter of disbelief...and I have long believed that upon hearing of the existence of Isaacium rings in the cores of stars, and in planets, and in stellar jet systems and in galatic cores that most mainstream cosmologists and astrophysicists will, at first, laugh in disbelief.

E. This physics, utilizing the discrete velocity potential as the most elementary building block, allows one to illustrate the existence of a 'null potential line' as the mapping of a discrete velocity potential onto its conjugate. The Archetype structure is composed of the complete metric set (n-1) of such potentials and their conjugates organized into a toroidal geometry. Such a geometry where the potentials and their conjugates are mapped to a ring produces a structure which can be characterized as consisting of layers of closed equipotential surfaces of increasing curvature (just as we assume charged particles have). Since each null line is a null motion line we end up with null motion equipotential surfaces. This structure then has a null motion gradient which is the same thing as a 'time-gradient' field. A 'time-gradient' field is a gravitational field. Thus we end up with a particle which has the unit gravitational 'charge'.

F. This physics, utilizing the Archetype or Electromagnetotoroid (EMT) and showing that it oscillates between two current modes, toroidal and poloidal, demonstrates that fundamental charged particles, in a sense, are equivalent to magnetic monopoles. This is demonstrated as the appearance and disappearance of the simplest dipole is dependent wholly upon the current vector mode of the Archetype, showing that when it is toroidal the dipole appears and when it is poloidal the dipole ceases to exist.

G. This physics, utilizing the Archetype , or EMT illuminates some previously not well publicized shortcomings of Maxwell's Equations. When written in terms of E and H only, the two equations that are related to the propagation of electromagnetic radiation are given as:
∇ X H = ε_O ^∂E/_∂t
∇ X E = -μ_O ^∂H/_∂t
The problem is that there is an implicit toroidal geometry in these vector fields and that if one really examines the vectors which comprise these structures then it becomes apparent that something is truly missing because one cannot get from one vector field form to the other using this implicit geometry. Most electromagnetic engineering textbooks handwave students past this in their explanation of the propagation of electromagnetic radiation. Thus we see that these equations are necessarily empirical and this leaves a big puzzle because we see that these equations are, at least, the beginning and end points for the process of the propagation of EM quanta. What is going on and where are the equations that show the true transformation of the ∇ X H vector field into the ∇ X E vector field and vice versa? Here is where an amazing discovery enters. In searching for the transformation process whereby the flux density vector of a ∇ X H vector field can effectively accomplish what would be equivalent to the π/2 radian rotation around the axis of the Poynting vector at every point so that it can become transformed into the ∇ X E vector field or vice versa, it became apparent that two things were taking place. First, one sees that the Poynting vector must necessarily change directions from an inward pointing normal to the flux toroid to an outward pointing normal or vice versa. This implies a Poynting vector density change and such change if one identifies the Poynting vector with a discrete velocity potential then one sees that such a change implicitly would give rise to a ∇ X H vector field on the equipotential surface of the flux toroid. This expanding vector field...because it is constrained to a closed surface must necessarily self intersect. If the flux toroid is in the ∇ X E vector field mode then the magnetic flux density (B) is maximized along the poloidal axis and any vector field arising in that area will find that the shortest route to self intersection is around the poloidal axis at the inner equator. This immediately converts the rising vector field to a toroidal orientation and if this change is of sufficient magnitude then the entire flux toroid begins to be transformed. Examination of the secondary vectors shows us that a ∇ X E vector field will display the characteristics of a magnetic dipole and that a ∇ X H vector field will display the characteristics of an electric dipole. During the ∇ X H vector field vector field mode the flux toroid is self compacting and that any secondary vector fields that arise near the inner equator will intersect rapidly around the poloidal axis while the inner equator is at the quantum scale. This will produce copious quantities of quantum scale flux toroids that are in direct identity with neutrons. Thus, we see that there is revealed a matter creation mechanism in the cores of these vector fields...a matter creation mechanism that is really doing nothing but introducing new geometry into the universe and that is perfectly consistent with Noether's Theorem because each flux toroid can be seen to be a charge and its conjugate in superposition which establishes and maintains charge symmetry globally.
H. So we discover quite by intuition and logic (in G. above) a process that leads to the immediate conclusion of the generation of self similar structures (to the Archetype) at various size scales from dense current or dense flux elements and hence implies neutron creation from any flux element which has a sufficiently fast positive change in flux density.

I. This physics utilizing the toroidal geometry of the Archetype shows that the curl function of a poloidal flux vector is related to particle spin.

J. Because of (I.) above, and the principle that the propagation of a current requires the antiparallel propagation of the current's conjugate (electron vs. electron-hole) the Archetype , in a toroidal current mode, is equivalent to spin-up/spin-down pairs of electrons (Cooper Pairs) in superconduction.

K. Because of (I.) above and the identification of the geometry of the Archetype with that of a neutron it is determined that the net spin of a neutron is zero which means that a neutron by definition must be a standing wave boson; however, because of the extreme time rate gradient field that exists as the core of the neutron is approached, the inner spin state cannot be accessed nor demonstrated (except by the beta decay of a neutron into a proton, electron, and antineutrino). This analysis then implies that the antineutrino also must be a boson.

L. Because of the elimination of continuous structures that are replaced by discrete velocity potentials which, in fact, are the links from every particle to every other particle in the universe it is evident that the true physics of the universe is largely nonlocal and totally symmetric and perfectly conservative globally but does not have to be conservative with respect to the introduction of new geometry and hence has processes that may appear to be non-conservative at the local level. In other words the universe has a mechanism for furnishing itself with new mass.

It is appropriate to talk of particles as either composite particles (made of two oppositely charged particles) which are equivalent in structure to the Archetype so that they are null charge particles or as half particles which are elementary charged particles. In a universe of n composite particles there are n half particles which are sink type particles and n half particles of source type particles. Half particles have half integral spin where composite particles have integral spin. In a universe of only composite particles, where we can conceive of only null charged particles like neutrons then each null particle has velocity relationships to exactly n-1 other particles. But the fact that a null charge particle can be decomposed to two half particles (ordinary charged particles) which are charge conjugates of each other argues irrefutably for geometric closure. In other words, because a neutron decomposes to a proton and an electron then geometric closure is absolutely implied. This closure implies that a single composite particle has two dynamic relationships with other composite particles. Consider the topology of a closed surface (such as a sphere or a torus) where any particle A that has relative motion with respect to another particle B on that surface is both approaching and receding from particle B. Next, consider that any particle has dynamic or motion relationships with n-1 other particles. This means that A has n-1 source and n-1 sink relationships and, in fact, is composed only of those relationships - and, of course, we are back to the original hypothesis. One might argue that this is circularity and, of course, it is exactly that in the same fashion that Maxwell's equations as traditionally taught in academia are circular. (A changing electric field produces a magnetic field but the time rate of change of the magnetic field produces an electric field which is changing in time so that the original hypothesis is arrived at once again.) So, we can say that the unit charge is composed of n-1 velocity potentials (of either sink or source type). The Archetype or composite particle has 2(n-1) or 2n-2 momentum states which sum to a net zero or more correctly net null state. Of course, considering that the universe consists of n such composite particles implies that the net momentum of the universe must be zero or more perfectly, null. Closure also implies another rather important physical principle which is that the motion of a charged particle implies the opposite motion of its charge conjugate which is somewhat illustrated in the idea of the motion of an electron and the conjugate or opposite motion of an electron hole. So contrary to our ordinary conception we find that elementary charged particles cannot exist in true isolation any more than can the notion of magnetic monopoles. We recognize the composite nature of magnetic flux and expect no singly isolated monopole particle but unfortunately we fail to recognize (in the standard conception of the motion of a charge) that such motion cannot take place in isolation (sans its conjugate) in a closed universe. In other words, charges really only have the appearance of isolation but, in fact, do not and cannot move or exist in isolation but always have a continuous relationship in their conjugate (observed or not).

M. Since any particle has n-1 momentum states (and hence energy states) the Archetype provides a structure through which any state can be accessed.

N. The net momenta of the universe is zero (or null). Since momentum is the product of mass and velocity we can assume that the net motion (velocity) of the universe is also zero or null. Hence, there are no global velocities (in other words, no absolute motion). Neither is there implied, then, a space-time background or continuum (universal field) compared to which any particle could have an absolute motion.

O. In a universe of n particles every half particle has exactly n-1 momentum states. Since momentum is a product of a particle's mass and its velocity, momentum is always a relative quality and it is only relative to the other particles in the universe with which it could have a 'relative' velocity. Newton's third law is frame independent (or invariant) with regard to any given particle pair. Which means that any particle already has equal and opposite momentum with every other particle in the universe that has motion with respect to it. In a universe of n particles its quite simple to see that there exactly ((n²)-n) momentum states but only ((n²)-n)/2 pairs of momentum states wherein each pair is composed of a particle's momentum state and the momentum state of the comparative particle from which the first particle's state was derived. Choosing the center of momentum frame always distributes the absolute velocity between the pair compoents inversely with respect to their masses and gives them equal and opposite momentum. Again, this picture implies a net momenta of the universe to be exactly zero or null. Zero momentum implies either zero mass or zero velocity so we surmise that the net motion of the universe is zero. This result does not change if the number of particles in the universe changes, that is, if n changes. Hence, the universe never has too few nor too many particles. This line of thought leads directly to the most important idea in physics which is the thought of the violation of the conservation of matter and energy because it is implied that n can change in the universe without changing the general state or condition of the universe.

P. The existence and validity of the charged particle interaction General Case and the development of an Archetype structure from a constricted beam of charged particles directly implies the apparent violation of the conservation of charge (since a finite number of like charged particles can be formed into a new structure which has a net charge of zero). But we see that this is truly not so from the global viewpoint. However, since the newly formed structure is seen to be composed of two counter oriented charge conjugate structures with the evident disappearance (via merging) of a finite number of like charged particles then the evidence points to the idea that in a universe of n particles that the quantity n can change. Since n-1 potentials is the definition of the unit charge or since n-1 potentials is the metric for determining the quantity of potentials which establishes the magnitude of the unit charge (by counting) then the generation and appearance of an Archetype structure is sufficient evidence of a change in the global metric (a global gauge change). Since the Archetype is a standing wave boson then it is logical to connect the the generation of bosons with global gauge changes. In fact, every generation of a boson is the evidence that global gauge changes are ubiquitous in the universe. This implies that every emission of EM quanta occurs because of global gauge changes.

Q. The Archetype (EMT) must oscillate between two states one of which is the ∇ X E vector field mode where there is the appearance of a magnetic dipole and the other of which is the ∇ X H vector field mode where the magnetic dipole mode is replaced by the electric dipole mode.