The church of SM physics

Quote from Aleksandr Nikitin

The problem of cold nuclear fusion LENR cannot be solved in principle within the framework of the Standard Model, because it describes only the interaction of elementary particles. She, to put it simply, explains how various “dishes” are made from various “ingredients” (6 quarks, 6 leptons, 4 bosons + Higgs boson + antiparticles). But it does not explain at all how and where these ingredients come from, are born and disappear, that is, the non-mechanical movement and change of fermion-baryon matter in the “space” surrounding it, which is the essence of the cold nuclear fusion LENR process.

The nucleus of each and every element an isotope has a specific structure to it. That is the key finding in the Structured Atom Model.
This structure is obviously due to the interaction of the nucleons (only protons and electron I argue). That means that the organization of the elements or structure of the nucleus of those elements, which keeps occurring time and time again automatically, offers us a way into studying the rules of interaction (of the nucleons). So in my mind this would offer us the best approach for further understanding fundamental (nuclear) physics and actually improve on the current standard model which is hopelessly unsatisfying and not able to bring us any further in realistic terms.

Quote from Edo

The nucleus of each and every element an isotope has a specific structure to it. That is the key finding in the Structured Atom Model.
This structure is obviously due to the interaction of the nucleons (only protons and electron I argue). That means that the organization of the elements or structure of the nucleus of those elements, which keeps occurring time and time again automatically, offers us a way into studying the rules of interaction (of the nucleons). So in my mind this would offer us the best approach for further understanding fundamental (nuclear) physics and actually improve on the current standard model which is hopelessly unsatisfying and not able to bring us any further in realistic terms.

All problems of modern physics, including cold nuclear fusion LENR, are easily solved if we postulate the primacy and absoluteness of the movement of matter in our World, that is, the atom is born and then disappears (oscillates, fluctuates), turning into a neutrino-energy field and back with the frequency of Planck time .

Read my comments and articles. Thank you.

CERN wants a new, and bigger, cathedral

Huge atom-smasher bid to find missing 95% of Universe

Researchers want a new, much bigger supercollider but is it worth us paying the £17bn price tag?

www.bbc.co.uk

Quote from Wyttenbach

This is a money laundering scheme for the industry as CERN's science game is over since a long time.

It is already clear as daylight that the synthesis of chemical elements occurs not only on the Sun, but also on the Earth, other planets, plants and animals, that is, in any material body. Let's continue the simple logical chain: Therefore, temperature and pressure are not the conditions necessary for nuclear fusion, but consequences of nuclear fusion. CERN experiments, the construction of Tokomaks and other thermonuclear reactors to obtain an increase in energy within the framework of the Standard Model of atomic structure are a dead end.

All our experience of knowledge and numerous experiments indicate that the modern scientific paradigm, in particular the theory of the atom, has exhausted itself.

Quote from Aleksandr Nikitin

All our experience of knowledge and numerous experiments indicate that the modern scientific paradigm, in particular the theory of the atom, has exhausted itself.

That's right, and not only the theory of the atom has exhausted itself, but also the theory of gravity. We all need a new revolutionary physical theory.

Quote from bayak

That's right, and not only the theory of the atom has exhausted itself, but also the theory of gravity. We all need a new revolutionary physical theory.

The modern theory of gravity is considered to be the General Theory of Relativity, in which space and time are deformed inhomogeneously under the influence of mass. General relativity is incompatible with quantum theory because spacetime and gravity are not quantized. In addition, with non-uniform time the law of conservation of energy is not observed (according to Noether’s theorem).

Our World is one. Consequently, modern physical theories do not adequately reflect the objective World in our heads. Conducting further experiments based on these theories is a waste of time and money. “Registration of gravitational waves” is the swan song of the modern scientific paradigm.

The modern theory of gravity is based on the internal (metric) geometry of Riemannian space, and in the new theory gravity should be described by dynamics in some simple enclosing space, where Riemannian geometry reflects only local properties of global dynamics. Similarly, quantum mechanics should be a simple consequence of solving the dynamic problem of random walk of vector field features in the enclosing space.

... is used to smash, smash, smash...

The fact of the matter is that they are all possessed by the passion of destruction, and it is necessary not to push particles together at enormous speeds, but to gradually collect them into clusters.

Dear bayak what do you think about the quark need/involvement in an Riemannian space you proposed ?

Second question, what does that mean exactly "bayak" ? probably a Russian word game or something like that ?

To me Cydonia , this is a Mars place... In France we say: be in the moon to describe people not fully focused... so imagine if i take place on Mars ahahha.

Quote from bayak

... is used to smash, smash, smash...

The fact of the matter is that they are all possessed by the passion of destruction, and it is necessary not to push particles together at enormous speeds, but to gradually collect them into clusters.

If my last name comes from the obsolete verb "баять", then it means to speak, to tell. As for quarks, it is probably not worth describing them in terms of Riemannian geometry. Most likely, quarks should be described in terms of the knot theory of the Clifford torus.

Quote from Wyttenbach

This is correct as I show in SOP that SM just handles the 3D/4D (3 rotation) flux (1.2% of the proton mass) of the proton.

Like, in one turn in 4D, a proton makes 3 turns in 3D? Something similar to a (1,3)-toric knot.

If I may cross-reference, here's the question "How to model a standard model?" And here's the answer:

Obviously, it is necessary to start modeling the standard model by modeling its global symmetries. And since the basic symmetry group of the standard model is SU(3)xSU(2)xU(1), we will first model this group. This problem has a solution if, as the basic element of our constructor, we use generators of linear vector fields tangent to the product $S^{1}\times S^{3}$, in which the radius of the circle is equal to the radius of a three-dimensional sphere. However, we also need to simulate symmetry breaking, so we propose to change the geometry of the product so that the radii of the circle and sphere differ. Then the group of global symmetries of the standard model must be constructed from vector fields tangent to the product $S^{1}\times S^{3}\times s^{3}$, where R(S^3)>R(s^3).

Quote from Wyttenbach

Sorry Bayak, mathematics has long time ago proven that we can only use fields with 2 degrees of freedom as the volume norm is not defined for higher spaces. So any mention of S³ is self deception.

The trick is that vector field generators implement paired rotations of the tangent surface of the 3-sphere, that is, in fact, there is a rotation of the Clifford torus.

Gentlemen! I have long been physically and mathematically describing our World in six-dimensional Brown-Bartini space-time (3 dimensions of space and 3 dimensions of time). Where did you get the idea that time only moves in one direction? In the case of a 6-dimensional description, everything is simplified and the true physical meaning is revealed: for example, the dimension of mass is equal to the dimension of electric charge, the dimension of the Hubble constant is the frequency of oscillations of the structure of the Cosmos, and the speed squared is the potential difference, and so on.