Quantum Gyroscopes

This post is a continuation from the previous one, the UP hypothesis. Here, I reveal more of physics in terms of the fabric of space as defined by that hypothesis. After explaining how and why the electron comes into existence and neutralise the proton in the most basic of atoms— the hydrogen atom, I will reveal the source of neutrinos, or rather antineutrinos, and explain the reason behind their abundance in space.

First however, I must confess that in my previous post I kept out an important consequence relating to the internal mechanics of the string elements forming matter particles. I intentionally kept it out to avoid over loading the reader with many new concepts. Now, I can reveal that each of the string element becomes gyroscopic in the plane of spin of the elements of the field in which it forms and cannot be turned in any other orientation. Attempting to gain access to it to physically force it to change orientation would cause it to decay. This sub-quantum reality of string elements is confirmed by the observed behaviour (precession) of protons in strong external magnetic fields, in which protons wobble about their axes of rotation.

The idea that string elements are gyroscopic may initially seem difficult to grasp, and one cannot be blamed for thinking: how could that be when everything we see, including ourselves, could be turned in all directions? So, how could an object be turned in all directions, yet the cores of its atoms remain in the same orientation? The answer lies in the structure and mechanics of subatomic particles and the way in which they interact with the fields surroundings them.

Let us consider a single atom for simplicity, because an isolated proton is a charged particle and as such it does not stay still. If we could practically pick up a hydrogen atom, by say a pair of quantum tweezers, we would pick it up at the outer perimeter of its direct magnetic field, which as I mentioned in my previous post defines its physical extent in space. Thus, the collective direct magnetic field of the tweezers’ atoms would press on that of the atom’s direct magnetic field and the friction between UPs in two fields ensures that the atom remain relatively stationary. If we then turn the atom around in all directions, we would only be turning the direct magnetic field of the atom, but not what is inside of it, which include the string element, the mass and the charge. Those remain inaccessible and unaffected.

Incidentally, the same applies to the tweezers’ atoms. I have not considered what happens to the electrons just yet, but their behaviour should become apparent after I reveal how the electron is born in the magnetic field of the proton, their interaction and relationship with their much tinier companion— the antineutrino.

As the proton’s charge drives the magnetic field, it agitates the UPs forming it. It also transfers the spin of its outer UPs to them and imparts on them rotational motion. In effect, it causes them to spin and rotate in the opposite direction to its rotation. Within a short time, those UPs develop into a secondary charge of opposite polarity to that of the proton. Like that of the proton, the new charge forms around a string element, which loses its spherical geometry to become a string-like under the negative pressure of the mass. Having mass and an electric charge, the newly formed structure is distinguished as a particle, which is none other than the electron.

It is interesting to note that this process, unlike that which results in the development of pairs of particles due to the eccentric collision of two UPs, results in forming an electron without its antiparticle— the positon. Positrons are formed by the decay of antineutrons in a beta decay. However, positrons could develop in pairs with electrons in high energy photon collisions, when such collisions are restrained by the direct magnetic fields of atoms— i.e., when close to atomic nuclei.

Once formed, the electron becomes a self-supporting mechanism that disrupts the action of the proton’s charge. When it reaches a stable size and configuration under the pressure of the direct magnetic field of the proton, the electron sets at the outer boundaries of the direct magnetic field of the proton, where the attraction and repulsion forces of the magnetic field zones interface, as I explained in Figs. 3 and 4 in my previous posts, which I reproduced here (see below).

Though the effect of the electron on the direct magnetic field of the proton is limited in physical extent, it is sufficient to neutralize it. In effect, it limits the extent of the disturbance caused by the electric charge of the proton and causes it lose its tendency to translate across space in the observed curvilinear trajectory that characterizes isolated charged particles. The proton does the same for the electron, hence the reason stable atoms are electrically neutral, unless ionized.

As a charged particle, the electron forms a magnetic field around itself at the perimeter of the direct magnetic field of the proton. This causes a twist in the story of particle creation. Like that of the proton, the electron’s charge imparts rotation and spin on the UPs in its direct magnetic field. This causes the development of a second and much smaller charge rotating in the opposite direction to the electron’s charge with a very tiny mass. This third particle is of course none other than the antineutrino. The reason it is an antineutrino, not a neutrino is the direction of rotation of UPs around its mass, namely the magnetic field. The electron couldn’t produce a neutrino, because the neutrino has the same direction of spin as the electron and the action of any charge is to produce a charge rotating in an opposite direction. Therefore, the positron produces a neutrino.

The fact that the antineutrino has mass supports the interpretation of the nature of subatomic particles based on the UP hypothesis and reveals the reason behind the apparent conservation of energy and charge. However, it should be noted that the conservation of charge does not relate to the size of the charge, but to its polarity (direction of rotation). Thus, for example, in the negative beta decay, in which a neutron, as a rotating string element that fails to form a charge because of its location in the atom, forms a charge outside of the atom and thus it transforms to a proton, which cause the development of a much smaller charge, which is that of the electron.

Although the charge of the electron is much smaller than that of the neutrino, it is nonetheless sufficient to neutralize it within the atom in conjunction with that of the proton. Since the mass of the neutrino necessary to stabilise the electron is far smaller than the mass of the electron needed to stabilise the proton, when neutrinos are lost they are very readily produced by the electron. This in fact explains the observed abundance of neutrino, or rather antineutrinos in space. But why would electrons lose their antineutrinos?

The answer is very simple, but it requires a quick glance again at Figs 3 and 4. As the saying goes “two’s a company, three’s a crowed”, for when the electron produces an antineutrino around the proton, the proton’s field immediately expels the new arrival, because it has the same polarity. On this account, electrons are forever producing antineutrinos, which means mass and consequently energy is forever increasing in the universe. This of course rings a bell regarding the nature of dark matter and the source of dark energy. However, antineutrinos and neutrinos from antimatter forming elsewhere in the universe are not the only source of dark matter and dark energy. Other source of those two aspects of physical reality will be considered in a future post.

Finally, given the mass of the neutrino and its antiparticle, if as I suspect they are charged particles, the magnitude of their charges would barely be detectable. In fact, the neutrino was until recently thought to be a massless particle.

Note from the author ___ 24/08/2017

After publishing this post on 13/08/2017, I searched google for relevant published papers on the subject and I found the following paper: Superactivation of quantum gyroscopes, by Giulio Chiribella, Rui Chao, and Yuxiang Yang, Center for Quantum Information, Institute for Interdisciplinary Information Sciences, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China.


Author: PhysicalRealityBlog

I am a structural design engineer with a passion for science and mathematics.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s