The church of SM physics

    • New
    Quote from bayak

    The local minimality of flows is provided by differential equations, and the global minimality is established by integral variational equations.

    This is the general method! But on particle internal level this simplistic approach no longer works as the metric locally is no longer linear (=> curvature of tangent can't vanish!). So you have to find a flux topology that globally satisfies the differential equation, what means for all points on a manifold.

    Further particles have 0 degree of freedom what means F(X,t) = F(X,t+P) P the period time. So variation is reduced to harmonic functions that themself again follow F(X,t) = F(X,t+P') P' e.g. equal an internal oscillation of an axes.

    If you once study the SOP charge function you can see this oscillation!


    You can only solve this problem with topology!

    • New

    Wyttenbach , You're partly right. If the topology of a closed space is already set, then the flows there should be globally minimal, since they minimize the length of the closed path. On the other hand, the topology of a closed manifold is given by a feature of the vector field of the flow, which is locally minimal outside the feature of the vector field.

    • New
    Quote from bayak

    On the other hand, the topology of a closed manifold is given by a feature of the vector field of the flow, which is locally minimal outside the feature of the vector field.

    This is a good question! There are oscillations that perturb the flux globally and some only in restricted dimension. So the problem does change from regular torus to mixed angle torus. But everything is just a rotation only flux field where your outside is the "inside"/area of the flux manifold. There is no outside action unless you produce some change in a projection like the potential.

    May be one day I will find some minutes to reason about the math structure needed for 4:1=5 rotation coupling with oscillation given by the potentially elliptic nature of the 5th rotation.

    • New

    Since we are talking about flows on closed manifolds, I suggest you take a closer look at flows along (2,3)-toric knots (homeomorphic to a trefoil) on a torus, on a pretzel and on a manifold of genus 3, in order to compare them with an electron, a muon and a tau-lepton.

    • New
    Quote from bayak

    Since we are talking about flows on closed manifolds, I suggest you take a closer look at flows along (2,3)-toric knots (homeomorphic to a trefoil) on a torus, on a pretzel and on a manifold of genus 3

    I'm using Octonions for higher Z nuclei. The problem is that you must be conform with the 2:1 action principle. Further, all flux must in average be constant at least around one 4D node. A tree foil has no higher order symmetry, but in 2D open systems, e.g. for photons, it looks pretty close to the possible solution.

    It's difficult to gives pictures as we map 6(8)D to 3D and then talk about projections that can have quite different 3D behavior.

    As said, currently I have no time left for deep theoretical work as this will need weeks or months.

    • New
    Quote from bayak

    The local minimality of flows is provided by differential equations, and the global minimality is established by integral variational equations. Maxwell's equations provide a local minimality of the electromagnetic vector potential flow in the Minkowski space.

    We physicists are tired of your mathematical fantasies. You tortured us with your false judgments about Maxwell's equations and about Minkowski space, which does not exist in nature... Maxwell's equations are an absolute lie! It is not difficult to verify this. Read my material carefully - We find Maxwell's mistakes in his treatise "Electricity and Magnetism", 01/19/2021 - https://cloud.mail.ru/public/Nj1U/VcuDSB5zT

    We find Maxwell's mistakes in his treatise "Electricity and Magnetism", 01/19/2021 - https://docs.google.com/file/d…98wsyrME/edit?usp=sharing

    • New
    Quote from bayak

    Since we are talking about flows on closed manifolds, I suggest you take a closer look at flows along (2,3)-toric knots (homeomorphic to a trefoil) on a torus, on a pretzel and on a manifold of genus 3, in order to compare them with an electron, a muon and a tau-lepton.

    There was no discovery of the electron in 1897. J. Thomson was fatally mistaken. 24.07.2023 - https://cloud.mail.ru/public/GAsy/kfh5GUjJU


    There was no discovery of the electron in 1897. J. Thomson was fatally mistaken. 24.07.2023 - https://docs.google.com/file/d…PG-ZFUMw/edit?usp=sharing

    • New
    Quote from Cherepanov2020

    There was no discovery of the electron in 1897. J. Thomson was fatally mistaken. 24.07.2023 - https://cloud.mail.ru/public/GAsy/kfh5GUjJU


    There was no discovery of the electron in 1897. J. Thomson was fatally mistaken. 24.07.2023 - https://docs.google.com/file/d…PG-ZFUMw/edit?usp=sharing

    There was too a discovery of the electron in 1897. J. Thomson was healthfully correct.

    There was too a discovery of the electron in 1897. J. Thomson was healthfully correct.

    J. J. Thomson autobiography | Department of Physics (cam.ac.uk)

    • New
    Quote from Wyttenbach

    What they did is simple to sum up: The tried to "calculate in" all known virtual particle interactions by using more than 10'000 Feynman diagrams. The main problem is that most virtual partial interaction of course must be gauged separately and are only only known between 1 and 4 digits exact. Summing 10'000 linear equation gives a systematic error of at least 2log(10000) = 14 what is at least 1.4 decimal digits.

    About Feynman's diagrams... I was told that at the end of his life, Richard Fenman admitted that he and Schwinger lied "a little" in their judgments, and therefore the Nobel Prize they received was undeserved... He admitted that they falsified the results... What do you know about this?

    • New
    Quote from Cherepanov2020

    About Feynman's diagrams... I was told that at the end of his life, Richard Fenman admitted that he and Schwinger lied "a little" in their judgments, and therefore the Nobel Prize they received was undeserved... He admitted that they falsified the results... What do you know about this?

    “I think I can say with confidence that no one understands quantum mechanics,” Richard Feynman once remarked.

    • New
    Quote from Cherepanov2020

    Unfortunately, J.J. Thomson died without knowing that Maxwell had “set him up with a false theory,”

    JJ died from old age at the age of 83, not from a 'fatal' electron theory.

    He. often said in lectures.." a scientific theory is a tool.. not a creed. "

    May your Cherepanov theory be a useful tool some day

    If I should live so long..

    Quote from Cherepanov2020

    “I think I can say with confidence that no one understands quantum mechanics,” Richard Feynman

    Feynman also said

    "science is the belief in the ignorance of experts"

    He was of course something of a showman, but there.may be a grain of truth.. there

    The Standard Model has been a creed. for the last 50 years

    long ago it was a tool. ..but now it is a stumbling block for many in nuclear research

    • New
    Quote from RobertBryant

    Feynman also said

    "science is the belief in the ignorance of experts"

    Feynman lives up to his reputation and makes his point more beautifully and eloquently than anyone else:


    «The scientist has a lot of experience with ignorance and doubt and uncertainty, and this experience is of very great importance, I think. When a scientist doesn’t know the answer to a problem, he is ignorant. When he has a hunch as to what the result is, he is uncertain. And when he is pretty darn sure of what the result is going to be, he is in some doubt. We have found it of paramount importance that in order to progress we must recognize the ignorance and leave room for doubt. Scientific knowledge is a body of statements of varying degrees of certainty– some most unsure, some nearly sure, none absolutely certain.»


    Feynman traces the roots of science to the vital anti-authoritarianism of brave minds like Galileo and reminds us:


    «Now, we scientists … take it for granted that it is perfectly consistent to be unsure — that it is possible to live and not know. But I don’t know whether everyone realizes that this is true. Our freedom to doubt was born of a struggle against authority in the early days of science. It was a very deep and strong struggle. Permit us to question — to doubt, that’s all — not to be sure. And I think it is important that we do not forget the importance of this struggle and thus perhaps lose what we have gained. Here lies a responsibility to society.»


    Feynman echoes Bertrand Russell’s contention that “without science, democracy is impossible” and aims at the bullseye of the scientist’s responsibility:


    «We are at the very beginning of time for the human race. It is not unreasonable that we grapple with problems. There are tens of thousands of years in the future. Our responsibility is to do what we can, learn what we can, improve the solutions and pass them on. It is our responsibility to leave the men of the future a free hand. In the impetuous youth of humanity, we can make grave errors that can stunt our growth for a long time. This we will do if we say we have the answers now, so young and ignorant; if we suppress all discussion, all criticism, saying, ‘This is it, boys, man is saved!’ and thus doom man for a long time to the chains of authority, confined to the limits of our present imagination. It has been done so many times before.


    It is our responsibility as scientists, knowing the great progress and great value of a satisfactory philosophy of ignorance, the great progress that is the fruit of freedom of thought, to proclaim the value of this freedom, to teach how doubt is not to be feared but welcomed and discussed, and to demand this freedom as our duty to all coming generations.»

    • New

    Doubt that an atom consists of an electron, a proton and a neutron... Analyze the experiments in which a discovery supposedly occurred... But there was no discovery, but there was a delusion of physicists who were deceived by Maxwell... Doubt and you will be happy in science.

    • New
    Quote from Cherepanov2020

    Doubt that the “electron” exists in nature and you will be happy in science.

    Happy if your repetitive revision of the electron etc contributes a useful tool...sometime.

    Maybe you could show on your thread. how it could be useful?

    In the meantime the 'fatal' electron theory seems to be sufficient for most practical electrical technology

Subscribe to our newsletter

It's sent once a month, you can unsubscribe at anytime!

View archive of previous newsletters

* indicates required

Your email address will be used to send you email newsletters only. See our Privacy Policy for more information.

Our Partners

Supporting researchers for over 20 years
Want to Advertise or Sponsor LENR Forum?
CLICK HERE to contact us.