Re: Complex physics with simple math and models

lindas4_at_aol.com
Date: 12/17/04 

Date: 17 Dec 2004 07:53:18 -0800

Bjoern Feuerbacher wrote:
> Lindas4 wrote:
> > This may be of interest to science teachers. Special relativistic
contraction,
> > mass increase, and the De Broglie equation are derived using
physical models
> > and simplified math on this Web site:
> >
> > http://www.stedjee1.infinology.net
>
> Commenting on your page "Fundamental Particle Structures":
>
> "The neutrino was predicted (in 1930) to account for apparently
> unconserved mass and momentum in radioactive decay."
>
> This is only vaguely right. Actually, it was predicted to account
> for apparently unconserved energy and angular momentum in radioactive

> (beta) decays."
>
>
> "Neutrinos and anti-neutrinos do not annihilate."
>
> Why do you think so? AFAIK, that has never been experimentally
> tested. But according to theory, they should indeed annihilate.
>
>
> "The picture of particle physics has been confused. There are too
many
> elementary particles for them to be elementary. So, let's make a
> supposition. Let's suppose that all "elementary" particles are
> themselves made up of a single kind of particle."
>
> You are not the first to think so... Physicists have tried to
> do something like that for decades now. The only approach (of
> probably dozens tried) which seems to work is string theory -
> unfortunately, a theory which is not yet testable.
>
>
> "Photons, neutrinos, and anti-neutrinos have spin only..."
>
> Have you never heard that neutrinos have weak charge?
>
>
> "...mass is now claimed but there is reason to doubt this. The light
and
> the neutrinos from Supernova 1987A arrived at the same time. If
> neutrinos had mass, they would have lagged behind."
>
> That is a non sequitur, arrived at by ignoring the actual data and
known
> processes in the explosion. For a better argument, you might look at
the
> first point here:
> <http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/lerner_errors.html#MISC>
>
>
> "When a muon (high-energy state electron) decays, it can decay into
an
> electron and a photon, or into an electron, neutrino and
anti-neutrino."
>
> The first is wrong, plain and simple. Such a decay is *not* possible.
>
> And in the second, you conveniently left out that the neutrino
> is a *muon* neutrino, and the anti-neutrino is an *electron*
> anti-neutrino. That there are three different types of neutrinos,
> one for each of the electron, the muon and the tauon, is
> well-established. There was even a Nobel prize for the corresponding
> experiment! But you ignore this in all of your musings...
>
>
> I already commented elsewhere on your paragraph discussing
conservation
> laws.
>
>
> WRT to your proposed triplet structures:
> 1) How are the particles supposed to be bound to each other?
> (by what force?)
> 2) Why shouldn't the neutrinos and anti-neutrinos annihilate?
> 3) What about the total spin and magnetic moment of the composed
> particle?
> 4) Why should such a linearstructure be stable? If the particles
> attract each other (which they have to, because otherwise there would
be
> no bindings!), a triangle structure would be much more stable.
> 5) If electrons, positrons and quarks had that structure, shouldn't
they
> have a preferred axis then? Why do they look to perfectly spherically

> symmetric in all experiments probing their behaviour?
>
>
> "Let's assume that a high energy quark that carries the same
charges as
> a stable quark is simply a high energy form of that quark, and a high

> mass electron that carries the same charge as the electron is just an

> excited state of the electron."
>
> Then decays like muon ---> electron + photon should be possible. But
> such decays have never been observed, despite extensive searches
> for them.
>
>
> Lower down...
>
> "However, case (2) does work. There is one more neutrino than
> anti-neutrino in the parent particle, and there is also one more
> neutrino than anti-neutrino in the decay products."
>
> So there is a neutrino and anti-neutrino produced (from the vacuum?)?
If
> that is possible, why is neutrino-antineutrino annihilation
> not possible?
>
>
> It is really impressive that your hypothesis works for so many
> decays. This may indeed by a sign that all the "elementary" particles

> are composed of smaller particles; and AFAIK, this line of
> argumentation has indeed already been used (you might try looking
> up "technicolor", if I remember the name correctly). But it is
> fairly clear that these more elementary particles are *not*
> neutrinos.
>
> BTW, you wrote the structure of the pi^0 meson as u ubar.
> Don't you know that it is a linear combination of u ubar
> and d dbar?
>
>
>
> Bye,
> Bjoern

Thanks to all who have commented on the suggested site, and special
thanks to Bjoern for his extensive and thoughtful commentary. That is
what I would call very constructive and useful criticism. I appreciate
the way that the comments point out specific areas of disagreement with
the author's statements, suggest corrections, and give credit for work
that he (Bjoern) agrees with. Just an FYI here - Bjoern refers to the
site as "your site". I am not the author of the papers, and so will
not respond to specific comments about the work. However, I think that
the comments will be useful and interesting to other readers, and I
will print and review them. And, who knows? Someone (maybe even the
original author, should he be a participant in this group) may take
ideas from the original work, and Bjoern's comments, and put them
together into something new and improved. After all, isn't that one of
the main purposes for this kind of forum?

Just out of curiosity, Bjoern, would you mind telling us your
profession? I get the impression you might be a physics professor
(it's the way you phrase your comments). Thanks again.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Evidence of the Existence of the Aether
    ... It's called indirect experimental evidence, ... No other standard model particle would exhibit that behavior, ... It's not only possible to detect neutrinos, ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Charge is not a property of particles.
    ... Its charge vector would be, ... The mode of interaction between neutrinos ... different particle masses come from? ... Correct, but it doesn't depend on path, only on energy. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Neutrino Mass and Supernovae
    ... Dear Bjoern, I've been having some posting/reading problems. ... >> subatomic particle encountering a material medium, ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Dark matter
    ... particles such as neutralinos, axions, or sterile neutrinos. ... Turn the light off and my bed is dark matter! ... consider the possibility of some sort of heavy neutrino like particle. ... Ya its called a Tau neutrino Very fat. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Ludwig Boltzmann, entropy
    ... How many neutrinos are there in the ... >like any other particle - and consequently adds to ... >the microstates avaible to any system that includes ... >> a system to move from one energy state to another. ...
    (talk.origins)