Hydrogen and the neutron

Discussion concerning the first major re-evaluation of Dewey B. Larson's Reciprocal System of theory, updated to include counterspace (Etheric spaces), projective geometry, and the non-local aspects of time/space.
Post Reply
User avatar
bperet
Posts: 1501
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 1:43 am
Location: 7.5.3.84.70.24.606
Contact:

Hydrogen and the neutron

Post by bperet »

bperet wrote:
Hydrogen, even though Larson lists it as 2-1-(1) is actually the proton + electron neutrino: 1-1-(1) + ½-½-(1) which yields an actual a-b-c notation of 1½-1½-(2).

As I write this, I am starting to question the structure of hydrogen in either case. Based on the chemical interactions, the former would give hydrogen a valence of +1, -1 or +2. In the latter case, a valence of +1 or -2. The former case obviously can not be correct, because the hydroxide ion OH wouldn't be an ion since the -2 of oxygen would bond with the +2 of hydrogen, leaving no net charge (being the more probably arrangement). In the latter case, the gas H2 could not exist, since hydrogen does not have the -1 valence to bond with itself.

Let me re-think this and get back to you.
Hydrogen

After due consideration, and a lot of simulation testing, I find that the only logical conclusion to the structure of hydrogen is this composition:

1) Material proton M 1-1-(1)

2) Captured charged electron neutrino, M ½-½-(1)

3) Optional captured c-positron (electron), C 0-0-(1) . Most likely present, given the sea of electrons we measure Hydrogen in.

Conclusion: Hydrogen is a sub-atomic particle, as defined by Larson's definition of an "incomplete atom". Structurally, it appears as an isotope of the proton (p + ve), but does not carry any "gravitational charge" because the neutrino IS the second rotating system (proton being the first), not a rotational vibration applied to two double-rotating systems.

One electron can be captured in the equivalent space of the proton.

This structure gives Hydrogen a valence of only +1 or -1 (proton) or -1 (electron neutrino). -2 is not an option, because this system acts as an aggregate of two, independent double-rotating systems, not a combination of two double-rotating systems (compound motion).

It would also make hydrogen extremely easy to produce in the stellar neighborhood, given all the free protons, electrons and neutrinos, and would therefore be a very abundant element in the galaxy.

Neutron (compound neutron)

The neutron has a similar structure to Hydrogen (Larson uses "compound neutron" to refer to the neutron, and "massless neutron" to refer to the muon neutrino. In RS2, "neutron" refers only to Larson's "compound neutron"). The structure being:

1) proton, M 1-1-(1)

2) cosmic charged electron neutrino, C (½)-(½)-1

The presence of the cosmic electron neutrino prohibits the capture of an electron (cosmic positron), because the proton only has room for one capture in its equivalent space. (If it captured an electron first, then it would capture a material electron neutrino and become hydrogen.)

Because the neutrino cannot fill the second double-rotating system position, the neutron is obviously sub-atomic.

This aggregate combination is unstable, and will decay along the probability lines described by Nehru in his article on the lifetime of the neutron.
Every dogma has its day...
Post Reply