Moon model of nuclear structure

Discussion concerning other (non-RS) systems of theory and the insights obtained from them, as applied to the developing RS2 theory.
Post Reply
User avatar
bperet
Posts: 1366
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 1:43 am
Location: 7.5.3.84.70.24.606
Contact:

Moon model of nuclear structure

Post by bperet » Fri Mar 24, 2017 8:30 am

In 1986, Robert J. Moon proposed a new model for the nucleus of an atom, based on the structure of nested, Platonic solids. Conventional theory just has the protons and neutrons clumped together in a ball, though they cannot tell which is which because the positive charge apparently bounces around, so any particle is "both and neither" a proton and/or neutron at any given moment. (It is the same logic used in the Schrödinger's cat experiment.)

The protons sit at the vertices of the nested polyhedra, defining the properties of the atomic system. But the problem that Moon and his students ran into was the placement of neutrons in the model--they never were able to find where to put them.

Of course, the Reciprocal System does not have this problem because the nucleus is based on rotations, not a clump of particles, and the system is naturally recursive (per Larson's discussion on inter-atomic distances in Basic Properties of Matter). But one would think of a "rotatation" as a rotational plane, not the point of a vertex. But that is not an issue, either, because in three dimensions, points and planes are geometric duals--as are the Platonic solids.

Moon's model can be updated to work with the RS by simply dualizing--swap cube and octahedron and dodecahedron and icosahedron. The tetrahedron is self-dual. Same model, but now the faces are the rotations--and NO neutrons to worry about, at a zero magnetic ionization level.

Moon's theory is based on the dense packing of particles, so I do not know if that is applicable to rotational systems, but it does parallel it.
Every dogma has its day...

Post Reply