Neutrinos
Posted: Thu Jan 19, 2017 3:57 pm
In the RS, Larson identified two neutrinos with the subatomic displacements of:
υe ½-½-(1) electron neutrino
υμ ½-½-0 muon neutrino (originally called a "massless neutron")
And their cosmic counterparts. There is also a third that shows up in conventional physics, the tau neutrino, which appears to have a structure of:
υτ ½-½-1 tau neutrino
Neutrinos are supposed to have no charge to them and with this displacement notation, only the electron neutrino has zero charge (net motion is zero). I have been looking at decay data, and noticed a couple of things: the decay energy (W) cannot be accounted for, unless you place a charge on the muon and tau neutrinos.
In RS2, a charge can take on different structures, because it is basically a birotation. The complex form is "electric" because of its one-dimensional nature, and the quaternion form (i.j.(-k)) is "magnetic" (2D).
The electron neutrino, having displacements in both space and time, can take either an electric or magnetic charge; Larson indicates that the magnetic charge seems to be more probable and is responsible for trapping the neutrino motion inside the time region of an atom, adding isotopic mass.
The muon neutrino only has a magnetic displacement, so it can only take on a magnetic charge in the inverse aspect; the material muon neutrino would have its charge in space. Charges are normally half (actually square root) of a unit, because they are only effective in the inward direction, but in the case of a 2-dimensional charge, the effect is that of a full unit of space. A charged muon neutrino would therefore have the equivalent of a 0-0-(1) displacement added to it, cancelling the temporal rotation and bringing the net, electrical effect to zero--making it electrically neutral.
The tau neutrino is similar, but is taking both an electric and magnetic charge in space, effectively cancelling its temporal rotation and making it electrically neutral, also.
But in analyzing the history of neutrinos and examining the decay sequences, it appears that they may have the neutrino and antineutrino backwards, by RS conventions.
In RS2, the positron is the "material" particle (temporal rotation) and is referred to as an anti-electron by conventional science (the electron being a spatial rotation). The electron should be an anti-positron. The same situation seems to have arisen with the neutrinos, where a material neutrino is called an anti-neutrino, because it is interacting with the 1D, electric displacement--and the temporal displacement is unobserved, written off as a tiny "mass" (since temporal displacement IS mass). It makes the neutrino LOOK like an electron, and since conventional science considers the electron to be "material", the neutrino followed the same path.
I am still working with the logic, but it appears to make more sense in beta decay sequences.
υe ½-½-(1) electron neutrino
υμ ½-½-0 muon neutrino (originally called a "massless neutron")
And their cosmic counterparts. There is also a third that shows up in conventional physics, the tau neutrino, which appears to have a structure of:
υτ ½-½-1 tau neutrino
Neutrinos are supposed to have no charge to them and with this displacement notation, only the electron neutrino has zero charge (net motion is zero). I have been looking at decay data, and noticed a couple of things: the decay energy (W) cannot be accounted for, unless you place a charge on the muon and tau neutrinos.
In RS2, a charge can take on different structures, because it is basically a birotation. The complex form is "electric" because of its one-dimensional nature, and the quaternion form (i.j.(-k)) is "magnetic" (2D).
The electron neutrino, having displacements in both space and time, can take either an electric or magnetic charge; Larson indicates that the magnetic charge seems to be more probable and is responsible for trapping the neutrino motion inside the time region of an atom, adding isotopic mass.
The muon neutrino only has a magnetic displacement, so it can only take on a magnetic charge in the inverse aspect; the material muon neutrino would have its charge in space. Charges are normally half (actually square root) of a unit, because they are only effective in the inward direction, but in the case of a 2-dimensional charge, the effect is that of a full unit of space. A charged muon neutrino would therefore have the equivalent of a 0-0-(1) displacement added to it, cancelling the temporal rotation and bringing the net, electrical effect to zero--making it electrically neutral.
The tau neutrino is similar, but is taking both an electric and magnetic charge in space, effectively cancelling its temporal rotation and making it electrically neutral, also.
But in analyzing the history of neutrinos and examining the decay sequences, it appears that they may have the neutrino and antineutrino backwards, by RS conventions.
In RS2, the positron is the "material" particle (temporal rotation) and is referred to as an anti-electron by conventional science (the electron being a spatial rotation). The electron should be an anti-positron. The same situation seems to have arisen with the neutrinos, where a material neutrino is called an anti-neutrino, because it is interacting with the 1D, electric displacement--and the temporal displacement is unobserved, written off as a tiny "mass" (since temporal displacement IS mass). It makes the neutrino LOOK like an electron, and since conventional science considers the electron to be "material", the neutrino followed the same path.
I am still working with the logic, but it appears to make more sense in beta decay sequences.