Bruce's 'Baffled' SO4 Thread.

Quote from Bruce__H

The text does refer to Figure 1 several times.

Here what the next reference tells:

The drawing in Fig. 1 (also Fig.4 below) reflects only one side of the reality. This is a split view projection of

the abstract “reality”. Magnetic field lines are always closed and the induced current (charge!) must be of 1,

3 or 5 rotation symmetry to be able to couple with magnetic flux.

Quote from Cherepanov2020

Wittenbach wrote his article and presented it to us in such a way that he was the first physicist to come up with a toroidal model of an electron and a proton ...

I know that historians are allowed to talk about anything the way the like it. SO(4) physics first called NPP2.0 is a project and the first version like NPP 2.01 are full of references to old unsuccessful models!

Quote from Bruce__H

I am not talking about retrodicting a known mass.

The current Standard model predicts the proton mass with an accuracy of 3%..

Some SM propagandists call this 'precise'.

Currently much of the QCD work is directed at reconciling theory with exptal values

we are talking of millions of man hours and gazillions of teraflops..

This 3% is unlikely to reduce in our lifetime..the QCD model is too crude IMHO

Man proposes and experimental values dispose..

to paraphrase the Latin from Kempis..or Proverbs 19.21(Living Bible)

Dirac spent years on an electron model...

unfortunately he failed because his model came nowhere near the exptal value for the spin

For Dirac it was easier to dispose of God then the electron spin?

• #88

3% of 938 Mevs is ~30 Mev..

This the Standard Model error is too crude for LENR,,

The fusion reaction can be simplified

4H--> He + ~25 Mev

in QCD theory has mass errors far in excess of the energy yield (~25 Mev)

4H(+/- 120 Mev) ---> He( +/- 120 Mev)

Wyttenbach has less errors for the proton mass.. also some other theories.. Magnetskiis. ether theory..

These theories may be more useful for LENR

Maybe Bruce-H has a better theory??

Quote from Bruce__H

The reason I keep asking a question about the direction of the induced magnetic fields in Figure 1 is because I believe that one can't define such a direction in 4 dimensions.

Mathematics has nothing to do with believe. If you don't understand Parsley then go on with this first. As said all basic actions are 2:1 and you can choose one dimension you like. Also in 4D, 3D"bodies" do interact. It is not homogeneous 4D math. Further there is no charge circulating. If you don't get this leave it. This is how nature works.

You should ask the experts why they still use fringe GR/QED math with the provably wrong metric for mass.

The drawing you miss to understand only explains that the interaction of magnetic moments in > 3D leads to a rotation and not to a twist. This is just a hint nothing more.

Quote from Bruce__H

I am talking about a risky prediction that differs from the predictions of other theories.

The most important prediction is the exact description of the gravitation force and its mechanism. The first prediction made was the quantization of the proton magnetic moment with a first energy of 1001eV that so far has been measured in 3 experiments. The next prediction we now deeply explore in our LENR experiments is that LENR reaction exchange energy by magnetic quanta we get from the so called magnetic states of isotopes. This has been verified by > 1000 spectrum.

There are many more predictions and some I do not publish as I now use them for LENR consulting. That the model works I do know since 3 years where I could show that the SO(4) quantum structure is conform with what we see in the gamma spectrum of 127-Sn. You find this in older versions.

As said by others too: QED/QFT/QCD/LQCD for dense mass is fringe physics. These model can only show interactions not actions of dense mass.

Wyttenbach

You mentioned in some other thread earlier that these kinds of structures require > 3D.

Also that the Maxwell-equations need to be extended to higher dimensions to achieve that.

How about starting the whole discussion from the extended equations ? Would it be easier to understand

these results as a consequence of the new set of equations ?

Quote from Rjzk

How about starting the whole discussion from the extended equations ?

This is future work. We now just have de-caved some of the rules that form our universe. Once we know for 100% that the laws and the structure of matter are compliant, then we can do the next step.

Goal: Find the underlying structures that in the 3D,t projection degenerate into the Maxwell laws.

Still open: Whether we need the full Octonion base also for particles. We certainly need it for higher Z nuclei.

But as said many time before: We just opened a new door into the world of true physics. Now more folks have to leave the children play ground and start to work out the details.

My focus is on cold fusion.

Quote from Wyttenbach

The most important prediction is the exact description of the gravitation force and its mechanism

There was an attempt made here.. by Roza in the Netherlands apparently Standard Modelish,,

Note the fudge constant alpha.. this is as close to gravity as SM will get , IMHO

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1603.08406.pdf

Quote from Wyttenbach

My focus is on cold fusion.

Michael Faraday invented his electric motor in 1822..

He used the 'flux' to invent it.

It is unlikely that his theoretical 'flux' would have been respected

without a stream or flux of experimental results..and maybe James Maxwell

would not have bothered to mathematize it..

Best of luck with the experiments. and with the new instruments and with Sm Yb Ag Sn Pd Ni .etc

"According to SO(4) math the maximum 3D-coupling of a 4D wave is half it's energy.

This can easily be understood as a 4D the wave is running simultaneously on the 3D “visible” front side and the invisible back side with opposite rigid momentum. We see the maximum at the expected 78.37keV.

This is halfthe energy of a neutron 4D energy hole wave. We also see peaks at the full wave energy (156.7keV) and the corresponding (symmetric) peak of the total release of neutron 4D excess energy release at 468.9keV.
The reaction that delivers the spectrum is running with an isotope that owns one neutron 4D energy hole wave.

It can accept one more neutron 4D energy hole wave or just couple with half the hole wave weight.

In fact the spectrum shows the coupling of the proton magnetic moment with one neutron 4D energy hole wave.

The yellow and orange rectangle (Fig.2) show just the exact numbers of peaks

predicted by the proton magnetic moment model.

(Also in the next 20keV interval the number is exact.) The maximal neutron wave coupling (78keV) region

of the spectrum looks interesting and further work is needed to better understand

why some energy levels seem to couple stronger than others.

The second part of the spectrum has not yet been fully explored.
We did not yet model the neutron-proton coupling, because

this spectrum was a huge surprise and needs an urgent communication.

We think that for the moment it is enough proof, that we see the exact amount of the expected resonance peaks and the exact energies for the coupling neutron waves. (between 20 and 80 keV, values in table 1 above).

New instruments are needed to measure the energy range between 0 and 20keV."

https://www.researchgate.net/p…context=ProjectUpdatesLog

.

Here the version 2.1.1 -soon 3 years ago - base line gamma ray filter output that is based on a 4D simplified Hamiltonian for the coupling.

It is already a miracle that this shows the integer number relations between different gamma base lines. Base line are lines that go down to "0" = fully de excite the nucleus. 127 SN.pdf

117-Sn is the middle of the periodic table as 1/2 of all strong force orbits are filled. A strong force orbit contains 7 strong force quanta and basically represents the structure of the Alpha wave. The alpha waves forms from the torus 7:4 mechanical rotating rigid mass form factor. The rational numbers (e.g. 2x7 , 1/7, 1/3 used for the whole column is the - expected - best match) show the mass contributions of the different involved rotators. A number like 1.666 (5/3) tells that one factor must be changed to get an integer e.g. 5 or 3.

The knowledge of the alpha wave is crucial for LENR and thus It will no be published until people understand the basics.

"Hamiltonians" in SO(4) physics have the basic shape of f(X) = f(Y) or f(X)/f(Y) = 1. That is the "sum" of the perturbations must level out. The main problem is that e.g. the gamma ray process is a multi level step process with 6D then 4D then 3D matches. Nothing really simple.

So the table shows the 4D - 3 rotator variation and not the 6D--> 4D-->3D matching. All values use the same 6D--> 4D and 4D-->3D fixed transformation that works on one class of coupling only

Quote from Bruce__H

Instead, It uses a Biot-Savart operator in 3D tangent spaces to the 3 sphere in R4.

Then you understand the consequences and how flux transport works in R4. You then also understand that then going from R3 to R4 introduces no new structure and only the flux gets transported. Now you extend it with one more dimension and then note that the flux gets transported by its own and only the winding number (2) survives.

The problem with the S3 picture is that on this surface you can only have two independent great circles that have no connection. Using a CT torus you can "line up = map" all 4 "great circles" to one line. For this you start with the 3D torus --> Cylinder --> rectangle --> diagonal. This is conform with the fact that all physical actions only can be 2:1. (4:1 = (2:1,2:1) : 2:1) or 2²:1.

This finally tells you that we can use the 3D,t rules and only must respect the metric changes induced by the real space (SO(4)) to 3D ,t space mapping. This is what I finally did. Change the sphere surface norm to CT torus norm and extend the involved radius (4) by square root 2 each. This only explains the flux not the flux tube needed for charge induction.