Proton-Electron Mass Ratio
Proton-Electron Mass Ratio
Asimov states that one of the unaswered questions in nuclear physics is the proton-electron mass ratio of 1,836. Does RT explain this ratio?
Electron-Proton size ratio
What if the electron and the proton are the same particle at different phases of expansion and contraction?
Proton-electron mass ratio is just mag/elec rotation ratio
Nothing But Motion, page 164, describes how mass is calculated from magnetic, electric and vibrational (charge) motion. On page 167, Larson calculates values for the basic, subatomic particles by summing up those pieces for the rotational structure.
The observed proton is actually a 50/50 mix of charged and uncharged protons, since conventional physics does not know there is a difference (see my old paper: Subatomic Mass Recalculated for an analysis). Using Larson's values from the table on page 167:
Average proton mass: 1.007594445
Charged electron mass: 0.00054874
Ratio: 1836.195 : 1
What it demonstrates is the mass ratio between the "double-rotating" magnetic system (of the proton) and the "single-rotating" electric system (of the electron).
The actual ratio between the magnetic (1-1-0, pure gravitational mass) and electric (0-0-1, uncharged electric rotation) is closer to 1739, but conventional physics compares the "average" proton, 1-1-(1), to the charged electron, 0-0-1*, which alters their mass slightly, making the ratio higher. The table on page 167 lists the components involved in the total mass.
The observed proton is actually a 50/50 mix of charged and uncharged protons, since conventional physics does not know there is a difference (see my old paper: Subatomic Mass Recalculated for an analysis). Using Larson's values from the table on page 167:
Average proton mass: 1.007594445
Charged electron mass: 0.00054874
Ratio: 1836.195 : 1
What it demonstrates is the mass ratio between the "double-rotating" magnetic system (of the proton) and the "single-rotating" electric system (of the electron).
The actual ratio between the magnetic (1-1-0, pure gravitational mass) and electric (0-0-1, uncharged electric rotation) is closer to 1739, but conventional physics compares the "average" proton, 1-1-(1), to the charged electron, 0-0-1*, which alters their mass slightly, making the ratio higher. The table on page 167 lists the components involved in the total mass.
Every dogma has its day...
It is almost beyond
It is almost beyond comprehension why this elegant explanation has not been peer reviewed and published in a major science journal.
It is obvious to me that there must be a large number of reasonable people who feel that Larson physics is a threat and must be suppressed.
Is it true that Larson physics is a threat, that it reveals forces that, in the wrong hands, could destroy our world? When will the world be ready for Larson?
It is obvious to me that there must be a large number of reasonable people who feel that Larson physics is a threat and must be suppressed.
Is it true that Larson physics is a threat, that it reveals forces that, in the wrong hands, could destroy our world? When will the world be ready for Larson?
Motion
If we are to begin to penetrate the mysteries of motion we must completely understand the most observable and ubiquitous motion, the orbits of the planets.
Kepler discovered that these orbits were not circular but elliptical. Newton's theory of gravity and inverse square law cannot explain the ellipse.
The inverse square would have the Earth fall into the Sun at Aphelion because the gravitational force is greateHt and the distance is shortest. Conversely, at Periheliion the Earth would fly off out of orbit. Mathis presented the problem well but fell short on the solutiion. He added another field that has a pushing rather than a pulling force.
Only one field is required it that field had been better understood. A rotating orb, and all rotate, created a gravitational field from their poles and not from their centers of mass. The analogy is the toy gyroscope I played with as a child. the inertial mass separaed to the two poles.
The greatest gravitational pull is in the plane perpendicualr to the mass, which is the equitorial plane. With axial tilts, variable gravitational pulls are encountered as an orbital revolves around the greater mass. We have missed the gravitational field as disguised as the magnetic field all this time.
I have told this to Miles many times but he does not respond. We can keep it simple with one field that controls all of motion. This would explain what Mathis is trying to do with his charge field.
Kepler discovered that these orbits were not circular but elliptical. Newton's theory of gravity and inverse square law cannot explain the ellipse.
The inverse square would have the Earth fall into the Sun at Aphelion because the gravitational force is greateHt and the distance is shortest. Conversely, at Periheliion the Earth would fly off out of orbit. Mathis presented the problem well but fell short on the solutiion. He added another field that has a pushing rather than a pulling force.
Only one field is required it that field had been better understood. A rotating orb, and all rotate, created a gravitational field from their poles and not from their centers of mass. The analogy is the toy gyroscope I played with as a child. the inertial mass separaed to the two poles.
The greatest gravitational pull is in the plane perpendicualr to the mass, which is the equitorial plane. With axial tilts, variable gravitational pulls are encountered as an orbital revolves around the greater mass. We have missed the gravitational field as disguised as the magnetic field all this time.
I have told this to Miles many times but he does not respond. We can keep it simple with one field that controls all of motion. This would explain what Mathis is trying to do with his charge field.
Proton/electron ratio
A good mystery gets more grant money.It is almost beyond comprehension why this elegant explanation has not been peer reviewed and published in a major science journal.
Yes; people tend to get upset when they discovery that everything they've been told is wrong. The "committed investigators" will never even take an objective look at Larson's works; there is a file cabinet drawer in the Archive full of rejection letters to Larson--they refuse to let his ideas even be printed, let alone considered.It is obvious to me that there must be a large number of reasonable people who feel that Larson physics is a threat and must be suppressed.
Actually, when you have a clear understanding of the "natural consequences" of space and time, the consequences of your actions become far more obvious--and avoidable.Is it true that Larson physics is a threat, that it reveals forces that, in the wrong hands, could destroy our world? When will the world be ready for Larson?
There is no time like the present!
Every dogma has its day...
Matter is in space and space
Matter is in space and space is in matter.
All matter oscillates and rotates but science has not recognzed that the oscillations are expansion and contraction cycles of a spinning particle.
The proton and the electron and the neutron are the same particle. Remember that mass depends of density. The electron phase is the expanded particle and exhibits much less mass. The proton is the contracted particle with much more density and the greater mass.
All matter oscillates and rotates but science has not recognzed that the oscillations are expansion and contraction cycles of a spinning particle.
The proton and the electron and the neutron are the same particle. Remember that mass depends of density. The electron phase is the expanded particle and exhibits much less mass. The proton is the contracted particle with much more density and the greater mass.
Bypass Mainstream Education
The internet is making mainstream education obsolete. The Khan Academy is posting free lectures which are increasingly being used to accelerate student progress. Use this new medium to bypass mainstream education and reach the public directly. Larson's theories can be comprehended at the high school level. Before long student pressure will create demand for college and university coverage. Please consider sending some well crafted lecture material to The Khan Academy. One of the first lectures should explore the dificiencies of the standard model and present Larson as the obvious replacement theory. The elites have taught us well. Their techniques of manipulation can be used equally well to benefit of mankind.