Bengt E Nyman

1. In case of for example a hydrogen atom there are two levels of charge posturing occurring in reaction to adjacent charges: 1.1. On an atomic scale, there is a distortion of the electron orbit around the proton, separating the center of orbit of the electron from the location of the effective, compound charge of the proton. 1.2. On a proton scale the two up quarks and the one down quark form a triangle which can turn and tumble in response to adjacent charges at a nuclear level. Both play a roll in gravity though the electron-nucleus dipole formation on the atomic scale is the larger contributor to ES forces causing gravity. Posturing of the quarks at a nuclear level is responsible for ES forces causing strong force. 2. Correct. And how do we measure mass, irrespective of weight ? We all know that the mass of an object is not the sum of the masses of its free constituents, however, the mass of an object is the sum of the masses of its constituents.

I have no argument with that. The point of these over-simplified simulations is to show that strong force is the result of a large number of competing ES forces. I believe you. The point of these over-simplified simulations is to show that strong force is the result of a large number of competing ES forces. No argument. See above. These simple simulations show ES particle posturing, compound ES forces and subsequent particle accelerations prior to any nuclear reactions between participating particles. This is not an attempt to simulate subsequent nuclear reactions.

All the simulations are mathematically based computer simulations using 2D Interactive Physics software and 3D Newton software with real masses and real ES forces but with slow motion time scales. The figures shown are the result of 3D modeling showing the posturing of electrostatically charged particles as a dimensional basis for calculating binding forces and binding energy. Manual math using Coulombs Law were then used to calculate all ES forces and subsequent binding energy of Deuterium based on the posturing given by the simulations. The calculated binding energy of deuterium coincides with published values. My claim and prediction is that strong force is the result of posturing between electrostatically charged sub particles and subsequent composite of competing attracting and repulsing ES forces.

Imagine a wet soap the size of a tennis ball. Put it in one hand and maintain a good grip on it. That's fusion with strong force. Now let the soap slip out just a little bit and feel the strong force cross over from attraction to repulsion while the piece of soap slips out of your hand and shoots across the room. That's fission, with the same forces but a different result.

Strong Force In today’s Standard Model, Strong Force is considered one of the four fundamental forces in the universe. Strong Force is described as the strongest of the four forces and as having the shortest reach. The composite dipole hypothesis described below suggests that Strong Force is the result of a multitude of dipole force vectors. These force vectors are both attracting and repelling. The fact that these different dipole forces are based on different dipole distances creates a complex resultant which is highly dependant on the distance between the particles. Let us start with two free protons placed in the vicinity of each other. Looking closer at the protons we know that they each consist of a group of three quarks. There is one external ES force vector between each quark in one proton and each quark in the other proton, for a total of nine external ES force vectors. Now let us force these protons closer together. So close that the cheeks of the protons are no further apart than the quarks in one of the protons. At least one of the quarks in proton 1 is now very close to one of the quarks in proton 2. If these close-up quarks are of the same charge it is easy to see that the composite force is likely to be repulsing. Because even if the remaining and more distant quark charges attract each other they are disadvantaged by their longer separation distance. However if these nearby charges happen to be attracting each other while the more distant charges repel each other it would appear that the situation could turn out differently. Simulations made with two different kinds of physics software both show the following: 1. Two protons placed closely together will repel each other most of the time. 2. Two protons shot at each other will bounce off and repel each other most of the time. 3. However, it is occasionally possible to shoot two protons at each other with the right speed and quark positions so that they latch on to each other, fuse and stay together, held in place by Strong Force. See simulation links below. Two protons affect each other with a total of nine ES force vectors. Five of these are repelling and four are attracting. At most distances between the protons these vectors add up to a resultant which is an overwhelmingly repelling force. However, once two protons come close enough to each other, with the right quark postures, they fuse and latch together with Strong Force. Strong Force is a conditional resultant force made up of nine force vectors. Strong Force depends on very close distances between attracting constituents to remain positive. If we could grab two fused protons and start pulling them apart we would find that as we increase the gap between the attracting quarks the Strong Force weakens very quickly. Very soon we would reach the mathematical crossover point where the resultant of the nine ES force vectors becomes zero and where the two protons loose their grip on each other. This is where Strong Force goes to zero, changes its name and transforms into a much weaker, nine component repelling force, which we know as repulsion between similarly charged objects. 2D Repulsion between 2 protons 2D Collision between 2 protons 2D Special collision between 2 protons producing Fusion and Strong Force Please note the very similar initial conditions in the two simulations below; In the first simulation the two protons are placed just outside the reach of the Strong Force resulting in repulsion between the protons. In the second simulation the protons are placed just inside the reach of the Strong Force resulting in fusion of the two protons. 3D Charge Posturing and ES repulsion between 2 protons 3D Charge Posturing and ES Strong Force between 2 protons Binding Energy, ES Strong Force and Strong Force Reach The above proton simulations suggest a specific quark posture between two fused protons. The same posturing is applied to the protons and quarks shown below in an attempt to quantify ES Strong Force and Strong Force Reach: The Effective Quark Radius used above expresses the inverse degree of freedom, or posturing space, that the quarks have within the protons. Please note that this value has been selected to produce a binding energy that matches known proton binding energy. This is done to show that ES attraction/repulsion and subsequent Charge Posturing is theoretically sufficient to cause the mechanism that we call strong force between two protons. It is also done to arrive at an Effective Quark Radius that can be used to test the credibility of this hypothesis in coming examples and calculations. Strong force in Deuterium The atom nucleus of Deuterium consists of one proton and one neutron. As compared to the case of two protons, Deuterium forms readily, is relatively stable and possesses a high binding energy. See link to posturing simulation below: 3D Charge Posturing and ES Strong Force between 1 proton and 1 neutron forming Deuterium; Close up: Slow motion: The above simulations suggest a specific quark posture between the fused proton and neutron. The posturing is symmetrical and three dimensional. The same posturing is applied to the protons and quarks shown below in two views. Three dimensional design software was used to reconstruct the nucleus of Deuterium in accordance with the simulation results above to establish an accurate nucleus geometry and the 3D quark distances seen below: Using the effective quark radius calculated in the case of strong force between two protons we can now test our ES Strong Force hypothesis by calculating the theoretical binding energy in Deuterium and compare it to the known binding energy. Note that the ES strong force, or binding force in Deuterium never goes to zero why the integration of the binding energy theoretically can go on for ever. In this case the energy integration is stopped at a distance between proton and neutron where the ES strong force falls below 1/1000 of the contact strong force. Also note that the theoretically calculated ES Strong Force produces a binding energy which is identical to the known binding energy. This result provides support for the hypothesis that what we call strong force is caused by the complex composite of electro static forces between electrically charged nuclei constituents shown above. The Neutron The three naked quarks in the neutron are held together by two electrons. The electrons reside at the hub of the triangle of the three quarks, one on each side of the hub. The three naked quarks plus two electrons give the neutron an overall charge of 0. However, the neutron has three externally exposed constituents with a charge of +2/3e and two with a charge of -1e. These potential ES attachment points play a key role in producing and explaining ES Strong Force and in quantifying ES Binding Energy. See proposed 3D model of the Neutron in the simulation below: Gravity, Strong Force, Deuterium and Tritium revisited The 3D simulations shown below use the proton and neutron models proposed above. These simulations show behaviors very similar to those shown earlier using the older models of positively and negatively charged quarks. The difference is that the older models fail to support quantification of known binding energies in larger nuclei, whereas the new models support ES Gravity and ES Strong Force as well as calculation of ES binding energies in larger nuclei. Neutron Gravity: Proton Repulsion: Proton Strong Force: Please note the initial position in this simulation resulting in ES attraction and ES strong force compared to the previous simulation where the only slightly different initial position results in ES repulsion. Formation of Deuterium: Formation of Tritium: The naked quarks in the hadrons are all identical but are here shown in different colors to make it easier to identify the original proton and neutron geometries after fusion.

Of course not. But they all have a total mass of 1 kg, which is what counts. My claim is that available, free dipole charge is only a function of mass. Ask yourself: What is the definition of mass, and how do we measure it ? In most cases the answer is: By measuring its gravitational pull toward earth.

What is not true ? be more specific.

Not sure I understand the question. Material weight is the result of the weight of its constituents. Quarks, protons, neutrons and electrons make up the weight and are common between all mateials. The ability to form subatomic dipoles is therefore common between all materials explaining why available dipole charge is the same in all materials and only dependent on bodymass. More mass (quarks in neutrons) = more free dipole charge = more gravity calculated based on Coulombs free charge 8.6169*10^-11 Coulomb/kg Dipole posturing is not limited to electron orbit elasticity but also includes quark orientations in protons and neutrons. See strongforce.

Checking. You are right. Sorry. Recalculating. How about 8.6169*10^-11 Coulomb/kg. Please check. P.S. The dipole formations that I am talking about involve quarks, protons, neutrons and electrons. It has nothing to do with the choice of material, other than its mass.

Gravity between bodies is caused by electrostatic posturing and subsequent attraction. A body can be said to have a certain amount of virtual, visible, accessible or free dipole charge in response to the proximity of other bodies. This free dipole charge always postures to cause a net attraction force between bodies. The free dipole charge in a body is (sorry, recalculating Coulomb/kg) and is sensed by all bodies in its environment. Coulomb's Law now determines the attraction or "gravity" between bodies based on the free dipole charge in each body and the distance^2 between the bodies.

You mean: we already know that the Coulomb interaction and Newtonian gravity vary with distance^2. Don't worry. I am calculating a virtual charge, or visible charge, to produce a quantitative comparison between Newton and Coulomb. Take a break. I'll be back.

I thought you were going to ask this: Assume there is some kind of analogy between gravity and Coulomb electrostatic attraction, both quantified by r/x^2. For this to be true the product of the charges sensed by object A in object B and by object B in object A would have to be proportional to their masses m1 and m2, while independent of their distance r. What would make this possible ? "You will never further science by insisting that it be supported by what you already know."

I believe that van der Waal's force and similar are special cases driven by electrostatic interactions following Coulomb's law. I see no reason to start with van der Waal's in a case that is more general. I believe that Coulomb's law is at the starting point of all these cases and should be the starting point for any numerical analysis.

Good questions. 1. Compared to the very weak forces of gravity, Van der Waal's interactions produce stronger forces with a "shorter range".The ultimate force with short range is of course strongforce. All three, I believe belong to a diverse family of complex electrostatic interactions resulting from both attracting and repelling forces, some of which even reverse at certain distances, like strongforce. 2. In this case we are not talking about magnetic dipoles, magnetic fields, electric fields or voltages, but about electric charges and their interactions as determined by Coulombs Law (1/r^2).

Once upon a time we regarded atoms as the smallest possible building blocks of the universe. Today we understand that subatomic particles as well as photons are likely nests of even smaller, energetic, constituents of some sort. Studying the subatomic world, electric charge is a common ingredient. Even seemingly neutral particles like neutrons turn out to consist of smaller, electrically charged sub-particles. Mass is a well established unit of measure for something that responds to gravity and which exhibits inertia, characterized by requiring an external force to change speed or direction. We have long looked for a reason why a mass would attract another mass through what we call gravity. Why would two inert and truly neutral masses attract each other ? Accept instead that all bodies consist of electrically charged sub-particles which have some freedom to move and posture within the body. We know that these charged sub-particles are very responsive to other charged particles within the body. Why would they not show some degree of reaction to bodies consisting of charged particles and sub-particles in their external environment. I plan to post a second part of this hypothesis explaining the mechanism of strongforce, including a calculation of strongforce and binding energy in deuterium, supporting the quantitative aspects of this hypothesis about gravity and strongforce.

Inside Gravitons This is a hypothesis which claims that the Graviton is a name and a placeholder, not for an autonomous particle, but for a mechanism which is the result of composite electrostatic forces between electric charges in particles and bodies. The diagram below shows two hydrogen atoms and illustrates the mechanism of dipole formation producing dipole gravity. The electrons orbiting the protons of the two hydrogen atoms have some freedom to deform their orbits depending on external influences. In the case of the two atoms below, each proton attracts the electron of the other atom while also repelling the proton of the other atom. The result is an offset of both electron orbits in relation to their protons. As a consequence attracting charges move somewhat closer to each other while repulsing charges move slightly further away for each other. Calculations of the effect of this elasticity shows a tiny net increase in the sum of attracting forces compared to repulsing forces. The nature of the dipole effect and the forces produced are such that they always yield a tiny attracting net force between the two dipoles, particles, atoms or bodies. See arbitrary numerical example below. Attraction = e^2/0.9^2 + e^2/1.1^2 - e^2/1^2 - e^2/1^2 = e^2(1/0.81 + 1/1.21 - 1/1 - 1/1 = e^2(1.23456790 + 0.82644628 - 1 - 1) = e^2(0.06101418) = 0.061e^2 Calculations using real charges and dimensions of the two hydrogen atoms show that at a distance of 1 x 10^-12 meters between the two hydrogen atoms, the dipole distance of each hydrogen atom would be 3.672300 * 10^-31 meter, which is 6.939 * 10^-21 of the radius of the hydrogen atom, or 4.424 * 10^-18 of the radius of the proton. In other words, the charge shift or dipole distance required is extremely small, even compared to the radius of the proton. Links to Hydrogen Gravity simulations: 2D Charge Posturing, Dipole formation and Gravity between 2 simulated hydrogen atoms: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKa3-LS3rpc 2D Charge Posturing, Dipole formation and Gravity between 2 hydrogen atoms with free quarks: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8sZvadCHH4 3D Charge Posturing, Dipole formation and ES Gravity between 2 hydrogen atoms. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9NxBjszft2Y Links to Neutron Gravity simulations 2D Charge Posturing and Gravity between 2 neutrons with trapped quarks: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nSGeHRyfcho 3D Charge Posturing and ES Gravity between 2 neutrons: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GL1Qs-jO6iE Multiple Body Gravity Each body reacts to each and every body in its environment. In case of for example three hydrogen atoms, the dipole formation of each atom becomes the result of the response to the charges in both adjacent atoms. Take for example one of the three hydrogen atoms below. The proton in this atom is attracted to both adjacent electrons and repelled by both adjacent protons while the electron in the same atom is is attracted to both adjacent protons and repelled by both adjacent electrons. The vector diagram below shows all twelve force vectors involved. The size of the individual forces is determined by Coulombs Law. The individual force vectors for each atom point in different directions. As always, with multiple force vectors acting on one and the same body, the resultant vector determines the composite force acting on the body. In this case the resultant points between the two adjacent atoms and describes the direction of the dipole axis and the gravitational pull on said atom. In case of more bodies in the environment there are additional individual force vectors, the composite of which determines the direction of the composite force, the composite dipole axis of each body and the gravitational pull on that body.

Please go to url deleted Moderators, please let me know what you think.