Reciprocal System Research Society

Dear Bruce,

Hope you are aware that I have taken up the project of computing the energy levels of the Elements, under Dr.Nehru's guidance. Presently we intend to start from a-b-c displacements of the atom and work it out. Could you please send me the calculations you did for Hydrogen?

How do we conceive the so-called s, p, d, f "shells" and sub-shells in our (RS2) context? Dr.Nehru appraises me that you have come up with the standard polyhedra [ the cube, the octahedron, the dodecahedron, etc. ] as quantisation of DIRECTION in the time region [ counter space ]. This might help in my energy calculation methodology.

Could you give us any source where from the standard energy levels of the atoms could be downloaded?

Dr.Nehru conveys his regards to you. Looking forward to your help in my project.

Sincerely,

Sarada.

Sarada Kesiraju wrote:

Hope you are aware that I have taken up the project of computing the energy levels of the Elements, under Dr.Nehru's guidance.

Yes, Nehru did inform me of your research. It looks like a very challenging project!

Sarada Kesiraju wrote:

Presently we intend to start from a-b-c displacements of the atom and work it out. Could you please send me the calculations you did for Hydrogen?

In the RS2 version of the Reciprocal System, I classify hydrogen as "sub-atomic" because it is an aggregate motion of a proton and charged electron neutrino, not having the compound motion that results from two double-rotating systems which are present in atoms. I actually start the periodic table with deuterium as element #1, and do not consider deuterium to be an isotope of hydrogen.

Since Larson attributes isotopic mass to the capture of charged electron neutrinos by atoms, and I find the same to be true in RS2, hydrogen is actually an "isotope" of the proton, having captured a single, charged electron neutrino. Deuterium is the true 1st element of the periodic table, with an isotope of tritium.

With that in mind, the calculations I did were actually apply to the proton and its "isotope", hydrogen, not to the atoms, themselves. (I did not realize this when I had originally done the calculations).

The a-b-c notation for the material proton is M 1-1-(1). (I trust Nehru explained that even though this has the same format as the atomic notation, it does not represent the same structure since atoms are TWO double-rotating systems, whereas the proton is ONE).

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.

Sarada Kesiraju wrote:

How do we conceive the so-called s, p, d, f "shells" and sub-shells in our (RS2) context? Dr.Nehru appraises me that you have come up with the standard polyhedra [ the cube, the octahedron, the dodecahedron, etc. ] as quantisation of DIRECTION in the time region [ counter space ]. This might help in my energy calculation methodology.

Yes, when I attempted to model the projection as a quantization of direction, rather than getting a sphere I got polyhedra. The "s" level is the tetrahedron, "p" is the dodecahedron and "d" is the icosahedron. The "f" level was a 28-sided triangular mesh, and I suspect the difficulties they have with "f" level energy levels come from the fact that this structure is not as stable as the Platonic solids of the other levels.

Each face of the polyhedra represented a rotational plane. When you transform a polyhedron from polar to Euclidean geometry, the centers of each set of opposing faces form a linear "axis". This axis exists in the equivalent space of the atom, and can capture an electron (since the relation of space-to-space does not constitute motion, electrons get stuck). Therefore, the maximum number of electrons each polyhedron can capture is the "faces/2": tetrahedron (s), 4 faces = 2 electron captures. Dodecahedron (p), 12 faces = 6 electron captures. Icosahedron (d), 20 faces, 10 electron captures.

Each of these polyhedrons come in a set, based on the magnetic speed (a-b notation). The basic motion of helium has the tetrahedron and dodecahedron present, which means it can capture 2+6 electrons (max), and gives rise to Helium thru Fluorine. Neon, still having the "b" speed move up to 2, has the same structure overlapped on the helium core, another tetrahedron-dodecahedron set, giving room for 8 more electron captures. When you move to Argon, a=3, and the icosahedron is added to the set.

If you don't follow my logic, I could try to produce some diagrams.

Sarada Kesiraju wrote:

Could you give us any source where from the standard energy levels of the atoms could be downloaded?

The link I have no longer works; I'll have to search the web. Do you have access to the "Physical Review" papers?

Bruce

Since I've been down with the flu for the last couple weeks, I put some time into researching the "legacy science" view of atomic energy levels for some background information and any details I may not have accounted for in my models. I found a couple physics professors who really knew their stuff, and they helped me come to a fairly good understanding of it -- well, at least an understanding of what they are trying to represent, because it became fairly obvious that they don't actually know what it represents. They usually default to "because that's the way Nature does it."

Here are my notes on the system, with some commentary regarding the RS/RS2:

1) The model is the Schrodinger design; a nucleus comprised of protons and neutrons, surrounded by "probability clouds" of electrons to neutralize the positive charge of the nucleus.

Notes: in the RS, the atomic "neutron" that accounts for isotopic mass is actually the captured, charged electron neutrino, M* ½-½-(1), and the “protons” are just temporal rotation. Electron motion is emulated by spatial displacement.

Problem: During a later discussion of beta and positron decay of the nucleus, the “neutrons” (electron neutrinos) are converted to protons by the emission of an electron. This does not follow in the RS, as ½-½-(1) => 1-1-(1) + 0-0-(1) does not add up. I cannot fathom a situation where an electron neutrino can be converted to enough temporal displacement to up the atomic number.

2) Each electron is defined by 4 quantum numbers, (n, l, m, s). “n” is the primary quantum number, and is 1 or more. It defines the primary “energy shell” in which the electrons exist about the nucleus.

Note: “n” can be determined by the formula A+B-2 = n, where A and B are the two magnetic rotations in the RS atomic notation of A-B-C, providing the “C” value is always temporal (never converted to a spatial displacement).

We know that temporal motion inside unit space affects the realm outside by the natural logarithm, and that ln(t) must be greater than 1 (unity) to have an effect outside. The first value to do that is ln(3)=1.1. Thus, the effect of the primary quantum number is noticed at ln(3), which explains why there is a “-2” in A+B-2=n. It is just offsetting the temporal displacement to the point where an effect is perceived outside unit space.

From this, I would deduce that the “energy shells” are actually outside the unit space and time region of the atom, existing in extension space. This may also explain the nucleus / electron cloud model more effectively, since the unit space would be seen as the nucleus.

3) “l” is the indicator of the sub-shell within the energy shell determined by the primary quantum number, “n”, and has a range of 0 .. (n-1). The values are associated with letters derived from spectroscopy terms:

0: “s” (sharp), 1: “p” (principal), 2: “d” (diffuse), 3: “f” (fundamental), 4: “g”, 5: “h”…

These sub-shells are used to compute the angular momentum of the electron thru the formula “L = (h/2π) sqrt(l(l+1))”, where “h” is Planck’s constant.

Note: The “s” sub-shell, where “l=0” produces NO angular momentum. Therefore, I assume that all energy associated with an “s” electron is intrinsic, not angular. Without angular momentum, this sub-shell cannot be subdivided into regions, as is done with the other levels, and limits it to 2 electrons, one “up” and one “down”. (See below).

4) “m” is used to break down each sub-shell into regions, where only 2 electrons can exist with opposite “spin” states. The range is from –l .. +l, which includes zero, so there are 2l+1 values for “m” for any “l”. “m” is “associated” with the angular momentum of “l”, and is a projection of that angular momentum in a direction of choice. For any orientation “z” the modified angular momentum is: Lz = m(h/2π).

Note: It seems they created “m” so that they didn’t have to deal with putting more than 2 electrons in any region, since electrons can only spin “up” or “down”, with no choices in-between. Thus, the “p” sub-shell has 3 regions of 2 electrons. This indicates that electrons prefer to exist in “pairs”. (I noticed in some of the energy level demos that when an atom would add to a higher sub-shell, rather than complete the “s” sub-shell, the “s” electron would also jump to pair up with the other at the higher sub-shell.)

5) “s” is the “spin”, which is either +½ (up) or -½ (down). This allows only 2 electrons to exist within the “m” region of the “l” sub-shell of the “n” energy level.

Note: What puzzles me is the electron’s spin of ½, rather than 1, which indicates a “solid rotation” (eg “magnetic”) instead of a regular rotation that one would expect from a spatial displacement. We may be looking at a north-south polar system here, rather than inverted charges.

6) The Periodic Table was initially arranged by groups of similar properties of the known elements, then later by the valence states. One of the more interesting features is that the atomic size DECREASES from left to right (as the atomic number increases), but INCREASES from top to bottom. The explanation was quite interesting; something about the increased number of protons pulling the electrons closer together, but that didn’t hold up because the increasing row number (which also increases the number of protons) made larger atoms.

7) Beta and positron decay was also covered. 3H1 (tritium) decays into 3He2 + e- + energy (either kinetic or gamma ray) (beta decay). 7Be4 decays into 7Li3 + e+ + energy (positron decay). This is common for the lighter elements.

Note: Helium-3 doesn’t exist in Larson’s RS, since the temporal rotation generates a MINIMUM mass of 2Z (where Z is the atomic number). Isotopes could range from 2Z to 3Z; any capture of neutrinos beyond 3Z would destabilize the atom (the neutrino motion would cancel the atomic motion). This needs to be investigated.

8) Atoms only accept and emit energy of specific wavelengths in quanta. Energy that does not match one of the energy bands of the atom will pass right thru. Atoms stimulated will always produce photons of specific frequencies.

Note: This actually bears a strange analogous relationship to LC tuning circuits in electronics. If this is the case, we are looking at the temporal rotations of the atom generating an "inductance field", with some type of capacitive effect that they are using electron clouds to justify. The gaps between energy bands may actually be some type of "dielectric" creating this capacitive effect. What the atom is then producing is a series of bandpass filters for radiation with its "energy levels".

Overall, I found that the atomic energy levels were created to solve two problems:

1) The valence states of atoms. Since they do not recognize the "magnetic valences" of the RS, some of the quantum structure is being used to cover that up and may not be valid.

2) The quantized emission and absorption of radiation.

I have located a good atomic spectra database for reference:

http://physics.nist.gov/PhysRefData/ASD/index.html

While digging thru some of the spectra data, I noticed that the "J" column -- the spin -- had some unexpected values. I had always assumed that the electron spin was 1/2, and it didn't matter where the electron was located to maintain that state. But, given the observed data, it appears that the spin changes with the sub-shell. Take He II for example:
From the data, the two spin states increase in conjunction with the increasing sub-shell, resulting in the following pattern (and I have not yet found any more than two spin states per sub-shell listed in the data):
The series continues to some very high spin numbers. In some cases it appears to reach a maximum, then all the observed data drops back to the (1/2,3/2) states only. (At least from a point of observation).

If we assume the model of electrons capturing photons, this makes some sense. The photon is a spin-1, the electron is spin-1/2. Therefore, one would expect the spin to increase from 1/2 to 3/2 upon the capture of a photon--an increase in the 1-dimensional rotation. Also from the data, the "spin" also changes the energy level of the sub-shell slightly. I would assume that since the "s" level contains no angular momentum, the spin-1/2 must indicate the intrinsic momentum state only.

Another thought I had was that if the atom is emitting a type of "shear" from the temporal rotations within it, it would manifest as a type of discrete, layered electric field about the atom. In the RS2 evaluation, the electron and photon have the same internal structure -- a birotating system -- which means that within this "field", a photon could be captured just like an electron, but would not need a physical electron present since the characteristics of the field emulate the spatial displacement of an electron. Then the process of absorption and emission become simple; speed added to the system; speed removed from the system. The photon's "spin" as frequency would determine where it would get caught (if at all) within the field about the atom. If the photon frequency "speed" does not match the field "speed" precisely (at a particular point), then there will be a net motion resulting, and the photon does not get captured.

The atomic energy levels would then be calculated solely from the atomic displacements, and have no direct correlation with physical electrons.

I recently received this email from Nehru, and am posting it to the RS2 forum in case others have some ideas regarding the Energy Levels in the RS.

I have also attached the paper mentioned (MS Word document).

KVK Nehru wrote:

Bruce, Gopi

You know Sarada has been working on the problem of Energy levels in the context of RS, RS2. Yesterday I have come across the attached cmn. sent to Maurice long ago:"Spectral Formula of the Atom in the Reciprocal System". I was trying to figure out the influence of the ‘quantum numbers’ n and l, in the RST context as the effect of the Inter-regional Ratio(s) applicable.

We will appreciate if some light could be thrown by either of you on what I said there. The specified time schedule for her Project is fast coming to an end, I am praying if we can come up with some good calculated values for the several Energy levels of the various Atoms.

Meanwhile my thought processes have not yet come back to their earlier efficiency. I am endeavoring to catch up with RS2 developments with great enthusiasm.

Greetings

Nehru

P.S.: I have used the following Greek letters in it: Alpha, Beta, Lambda, Mu and Rho

Sincerely

kvk. nehru

(Here is my reply to Nehru's email).

Hello Nehru,

I'll take a look at Maurice's stuff again. I have been working with atomic energy levels over the last week, but am still in the middle of analysis. One thing I did discover is that the "time region" has two "halves", as you determined with the atomic and nuclear zones. There are two possible combinations for unit of space (where s=1), 1/t (time region, 3D atomic zone--material) and t/1 (1D nuclear zone--cosmic). Taken with the latest idea that the "holes" of electric theory (the missing valence electrons), it would place the uncharged electrons in the atomic zone (moving thru the time of the atoms) and the conduction, charged electrons in the nuclear zone (moving thru the EM field of the atom). I believe the Fermi level ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_level ) is the junction point between the atomic and nuclear zones.

Given the RS2 structure of the electron and photon is a bit different than Larson, it might have some bearing:

Uncharged electron (s) = rotation; speed of ((n + 1) / n), typically 2/1. But "n" can have any value, so 54/53 is STILL a spatial displacement of unity (RS2 displacement is calculated by: t - s = displacement). This means the energy of the electron can be different for each electron (orbital level), and may also contribute to additional mass as a particle is accelerated and the ratio is increased due to the interaction of the acceleration fields.

The photon still follows the bi-rotational model you proposed.

The charged electron (t/s) is a compound motion of an uncharged electron (rotation) plus a photon (linear vibration) resulting in a rotational vibration.

Note that Energy (E, t/s) is not the same as electric charge (Q, t/s); the former being an inverse speed and the latter being a rotational vibration.

The only way a photon can be emitted in RS2 is if the electron is charged; an uncharged electron does not have two active rotations to create a photon, no matter its speed.

When a photon enters the atomic zone and impacts an electron, energy is conserved: hf = p + Ek, where p is also "hf", the work function or minimum energy to free an electron, and Ek (1/2 mv^2) is the max energy of the ejected electron.

Since we are dealing with motion, an electron can only remain in its quantum position if it speed is exactly opposite to the atom, at that point. If it does not exactly cancel out, the electron will continue to move and will either find an energy level with the same speed, or depart the atom. When enough electrons accumulate at a particular level, the net speed (atomic + electron) is zero, so any other electrons passing by will continue to move thru.

When a photon impacts the electron, giving it a charge, the electron speed changes with the additional motion of the photon. It also moves it out of the atomic zone (since t/s cannot move thru time of the atom, since it does not constitute motion) and into the nuclear zone. Granted, these two zones may geometrically coincident, so you won't actually see a spatial change of location, but the electric quantity of the uncharged "valence" electron, "q" (s) becomes the electric charge, "Q" (t/s) of the charged electron.

If this speed change is enough to get the electron into a new atomic speed zone, it will remain until the electron "decays" and emits the photon, at which time the electron will fall back to its original energy level, providing there is still room for it. If not, it is emitted.

I'll have to work on relating the quantum numbers. I'm still in the conceptual phase of accumulating knowledge and comparing legacy electrical theory to the new ideas in RS2, to see if I can sort it out. It appears that electrical theory is just as screwed up as astronomy and physical theory, with things backwards and inside-out!

What I will eventually attempt to model is that each "turn" in atomic counterspace will have a corresponding energy field (t/s) that is analogous to a cosmic speed zone, where the electron interactions take place. Energy levels would be a computation of these speed zones as discrete steps, some of which will never be occupied because there is no combination of electron speed to exactly counter it. The energy levels would therefore be a result of the quantized electron speeds + the quantized atomic speeds.

A few other problems appeared when attempting to find atomic speeds, which are dependent upon:

1) Magnetic ionization level (captured electron neutrinos creating isotopic mass)

2) Electric ionization level

3) Thermal ionization level

All the observed spectra I can find data for have these at non-zero levels, which is probably why the lightest elements are the easiest to compute--closest to zero levels.

I also noticed that the calculations for the atomic spectra of Hydrogen looks very similar to the calculation for potential energy: Ug = integral(h1,h2) of (G m1 m2) / r^2 dr = G m1 m2 (1/h1 - 1/h2), where h1 is the reference level (for example, the surface of the Earth to the center) and h2 is the measurement (distance from center to object). In the atomic application, h1 would be the speed of the level of atomic rotation, and h2 the speed of the electron.

Anyway, those are just some of my thoughts over the last week. Hope they might be of some help to you and Sarada. I'll keep you informed as I get deeper into it.

While looking through some nuclear physics, I hit upon this... apparently the Moon model builds up the entire Periodic table using platonic solids. Very similar to Larson's development, once we take care of the geometry.

What is interesting is that the divine ratio as well as the 'magic numbers' are explained naturally as a consequence of their model.

http://21stcenturysciencetech.com/Artic ... dicity.pdf

Gopi wrote:

While looking through some nuclear physics, I hit upon this... apparently the Moon model builds up the entire Periodic table using platonic solids. Very similar to Larson's development, once we take care of the geometry.

What is interesting is that the divine ratio as well as the 'magic numbers' are explained naturally as a consequence of their model.

http://21stcenturysciencetech.com/Artic ... dicity.pdf

Nehru and I stumbled upon this relationship early on (March, 2003), that being a "discrete" system, a projection of rotational motion (magnetic or electric rotations in the time region) would be polyhedral, not spherical...

http://forum.rs2theory.org/viewtopic.ph ... c&start=25

RS2 Post #5368 wrote:

I can't help but notice that there is a 1:1 correspondence between the number of facets on these polyhedral projections, and the number of electrons allowed per Bohr "shell". Though the facets, themselves, being merely a projection of turn into time-space would only account for atomic number -- not the energy level interactions. The thought also occurs that since each of these facets represents an internal rotation -- a temporal displacement, that each facet could, in fact, "capture" an uncharged electron, thus giving the APPEARANCE in time-space of an electron "cloud" arranged in shells about a nucleus. (The electron, of course, would be captured inside unit boundary, but it would be projected into the polyhedral face when viewed outside the TR.)

What is interesting about the comments I made at that time was that they referred to the electron shells, not the protons, and happen to be in the INVERSE relation to Moon's theory, being based on facets, not vertices.

Wouldn't it be fascinating if both are correct... that the "protons" are the vertices of the regular polygons, and the "electrons" are the faces? That would explain a lot!

And the fact that Moon's theory requires TWO sets of Platonic solids--2 double-rotating systems--makes sense with RS physics. The only place that I see where there is a problem area is that the system of regular solids, by his nested construct, is 92, not 117. We know from the RS that the 92 limit, where atoms become radioactive, is due to the magnetic ionization level being unity, not zero, so the first thing that would need consideration in this type of model is what effect the magnetic ionization level has on atomic geometry.

I'll spend some time with it and see where it leads. It looks quite promising, and I can easily see it opening the door to crystallography and molecular structures, as well as simplifying a computer model. And I'll bet you can find all the atomic physical constants buried in the geometry, as Dave's relationships are starting to point out.

Good find!