Re: beta decay (geometric)

Thomas Heger wrote:
An neutron is stable too, but not charged. Its a state where the radiation term is spinning around the time axis. This is possible but not stable. Any tiny disturbance could cause the tiny gyroskope to tilt, and the radiaton is split of. Within the atom the electrons shells off the disturbance, hence the neutron does not decay. But without the shell it could bump into some disturbance.

So explain how it is that all the protons in the nucleus do not provide such a "disturbance". Remember the strong interactions between protons and neutrons are zillions of times stronger than the electromagnetism that the electrons could screen. And also explain how it is that neutrons without an "electron shell" just happen to "bump into some disturbance" so regularly and uniformly that their lifetime is measured to 4 significant digits.

And when you're done with that, explain the entire hadronic "zoo" -- literally hundreds of different particles. The standard model is an approach to that the does rather well so far, without any of your mumbo-jumbo about "gyroscopes" and undefined "disturbances".

In short, it is not difficult to come up with an alternative explanation for one isolated fact about the world. But building a theory that satisfies the constraints of the entire experimental record is QUITE difficult.


Tom Roberts
.