elas

I have not revisited this thread since I wrote 'Requiem to a Thought' but by coincidence, as a direct result of a recent thread on the Casimir effect see: http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=38839 here I am again researching old papers, preparing a reply to 'swansont'. At the time of your question I could not have given a positive reply but, as a result of my work on a structural Table of Elements I can say yes I am talking about the Casimir effect. The key to understanding the Casimir force is in realizing that the Casimir effect occurs only where there are no gravitons; that is to say the Casimir effect occurs only in gaps and pits ('wells' in some professionally writings) that are to small for gravitons to enter in their entirety. In the original Casimir experiment using plates, gravitons act as plugs around the edges of the plates allowing only photonic matter into the gap between the plates. The photonic matter carries the observed waves. In atomic structure the gaps between electrons of each shell contain Casimir wells whose volume determines the nature of the atomic element. These wells are plug by the addition of more electrons until the shell thickness is so thin that 2 electrons fill the shell. Remember that unlike other forces; the strong force increases with distance so the outer electron shell is subject to the greatest strong force originating from the nucleus. Just imagine what would happen if gravity did the same!. Not only does a each part of each electron fill a Casimir gap, but, it (the electron) is also directly connected to a nuclear proton thereby forming a meson. This double bonding is what makes atoms tough cookies; and the cause of the complete structure can be explained using only the effect of vacuum force on different densities of matter giving rise to the first model of atomic structure that obeys the Law of Economy. Quantum theory provides the mathematics that allows the theorist to go from A to B without understand the 'cause' (QT is non-causal); classical physics explain the 'cause' with only the minimum of additional maths.

As we are clearly nearing the end of this debate, I should like to make a carefully considered reply to your question; however, my landlady has picked this moment to carry out major improvements to my abode, so I would appreciate your leaving this thread open for a little longer than usual so that I can write a reply during quiet moments. (The building work is expected to take about one month).

What I am trying to say is, that as in FQHE; there are two forces acting at right angle to each other (gravity in green, wave force in purple; plates outlined in red) that is why they are mathematically related. The difference between the compression created when gravity is forced around the outside of the plates and the resistance to compression provided by the wave force is the cause of both Casimir positive and negative forces. FQHE is described as creating an atom of electrons; likewise the Casimir effect creates an atom of photons. But I have left it to late to make my point. The audience has exited long ago.

It would appear that those darn professionals have beaten me to it: http://nextbigfuture.com/2008/09/darpa-seeks-to-use-force-casimir-force.html http://www.stanford.edu/group/kgb/Research/gravity2.html http://trs-new.jpl.nasa.gov/dspace/bitstream/2014/19232/1/98-0519.pdf http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/0295-5075/67/4/517 http://sciencelinks.jp/j-east/article/200707/000020070707A0148564.php

There is a difference between top and bottom of the gap and in the gap. There is also a difference between movement and force. The Casimir force is confined in the gap. There is an observed movement around the plates. I most certainly did say the absence of gravitons is responsible. But, on reflection I could have worded it better by saying above and below. Neither perfectly conveys the actuality which is that vacuum draws in part of a graviton at top an bottom. The whole is the same effect as a FQHE experiment with gravity replacing electromagnet force and the force direction reversed (i.e. gravity pulling outwards in stead of magnetic compression). The force at right angle to gravity, being expanded at right angle to its line of force;(replacing the compressed particles in FQHE), is of course; the Casimir force. Nature is a repetition of simple construction modules.

At no point have I said that gravity is responsible. I gave two quotes to support the suggestion that it is the absence of gravitons that creates the vacuum in which the Casimir effect appears; the quote that is being ignored is the one that points to the absence of gravitons, the second quote deals with the effect of the absence of gravitation. But, as no one bothers with threads transferred to speculations I see no point in spending time on keep the thread open.

Please take into account the full intent of the authors: What is the Casimir effect? Northeastern University experimental particle physicists Stephen Reucroft and John Swain put their heads together to write the following answer. ‘To understand the Casimir Effect, one first has to understand something about a vacuum in space as it is viewed in quantum field theory’ ‘One of the most interesting aspects of vacuum energy (with or without mirrors) is that, calculated in quantum field theory, it is infinite! To some, this finding implies that the vacuum of space could be an enormous source of energy--called "zero point energy." ‘But the finding also raises a physical problem: there's nothing to stop arbitrarily small waves from fitting between two mirrors, and there is an infinite number of these wavelengths. The mathematical solution is to temporarily do the calculation for a finite number of waves for two different separations of the mirrors, find the associated difference in vacuum energies and then argue that the difference remains finite as one allows the number of wavelengths to go to infinity’. ‘Although this trick works, and gives answers in agreement with experiment, the problem of an infinite vacuum energy is a serious one. Einstein's theory of gravitation implies that this energy must produce an infinite gravitational curvature of spacetime--something we most definitely do not observe. The resolution of this problem is still an open research question’. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged I am saddened to see that this thread has ended up where you feared but, that said; the Known Facts are as stated by Reucroft and Swain as quoted in my reply to swansont.

It was a response to the crude comments of one subscriber, it was not an appeal, or an attempt to prove anything. The term 'trends' is used on several web pages found using 'Tables of elements' as the search key. It is not something I thought up. Have done a web search and cannot find a site where Schrodinger equations are used to explain the internal structure of atoms; would greatly appreciate a reference to one that does. Attempts to get my work past review have resulted in three widely different reasons for rejection: Expert A wrote 'it is not science'. Expert B wrote 'your work is pure speculation'. Expert c wrote 'your article contains nothing that is new, you are not saying anything that is not already well know'. So I am here trying to resolve which expert is right.

'Spellcheck' added a 't', the correct address is: http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=what-is-the-casimir-effec Currently we do not have an explanation of the cause of the Casimir effect that accounts for the absence of curvature. My point is that where there are no gravitons there is no gravitation curvature. The gravitons are replace with an increase in photonic matter, hence the abundance of waves. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged 'Spellcheck' added a 't', the correct address is: http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=what-is-the-casimir-effec Currently we do not have an explanation of the cause of the Casimir effect that accounts for the absence of curvature. My point is that where there are no gravitons there is no gravitation curvature. The gravitons are replace with an increase in photonic matter, hence the abundance of waves.

extract from: http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/print/9747 New physics The Casimir effect could also play a role in accurate force measurements between the nanometre and micrometre scales. Newton's inverse-square law of gravitation has been tested many times at macroscopic distances by observing the motion of planets. But no-one has so far managed to verify the law at micron length scales with any great precision. Extract from: http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=what-is-the-casimir-effect One of the most interesting aspects of vacuum energy (with or without mirrors) is that, calculated in quantum field theory, it is infinite! To some, this finding implies that the vacuum of space could be an enormous source of energy--called "zero point energy." But the finding also raises a physical problem: there's nothing to stop arbitrarily small waves from fitting between two mirrors, and there is an infinite number of these wavelengths. The mathematical solution is to temporarily do the calculation for a finite number of waves for two different separations of the mirrors, find the associated difference in vacuum energies and then argue that the difference remains finite as one allows the number of wavelengths to go to infinity. Although this trick works, and gives answers in agreement with experiment, the problem of an infinite vacuum energy is a serious one. Einstein's theory of gravitation implies that this energy must produce an infinite gravitational curvature of spacetime--something we most definitely do not observe. The resolution of this problem is still an open research question. I assume that 'the law' referred to is the gravitation law; but, as I have already proposed a solution that explains why curvature is not observed; I will, as requested; leave further comment to the 'tricks' department.

The laws of physics include the statement that space has a minimum energy level; the speed of light in a vacuum is calculated on the basis of experiments where 'absolute vacuum' still has that minimum energy level. The speed of light in a gap subject to the Casimir effect is slightly faster because the particle that carries the minimum energy (graviton) cannot enter the gap in its entirety, therefore the gap has a slightly greater vacuum force than the so-called absolute vacuum of 'empty' space. That is to say that the Scharnhorst effect is not against the Laws of Physics but, it does call for a slight adjustment to the current definition of 'absolute vacuum'. It is also pertinent to note that movement caused by the Casimir effect has only been observed in experiments where the plates are in a vertical position. It is therefore possible that the movement is a gravitational effect caused by the difference in gravitational force between the top and bottom of the plates.

The current tables do not explain mathematically, the cause of element classification, as the first reference I gave you shows, current tables explain trends. (See also the third entry in the list of 'Similar threads' at the bottom of this page). My table shows that when the outer halves of the shells have one less electron than the inner halves of the shells the element is an Alkali metal. When there is an equal number of electrons in each half the element is an Alkaline. When the difference between the numbers of electrons in each half is at its greatest the element is a noble gas. When the number of electrons in the outer half is one below maximum the element is a Halogen. This regularity at the beginning and end of the build up of each shell is due the maximum and minimum particle elasticity as each additional electron reduces the amount each electron is stretched over an area of the atomic surface. When the surface is fully covered the electrons are in a relaxed state at right angle to the radius while compressed by the vacuum force along the radius. Between Alkali and Noble gas the elastic force of the electrons varies from shell to shell giving rise to the other types of elements. See pages 2 and 3 of the pdf file for the complete table. I started work on this model (the Table of Elements is an offshoot of my main project) when insane-alien was two years old, recently I had a 1 1/2 hour debate with a bunch of academics and ended up convincing them that there just might be something in my model worth considering. Of course anything that is way out from current thinking is viewed with great caution; no one wants to say that I am right but, neither has anyone proved me wrong. You should not take too much notice of biased opinions but concentrate on constructive criticisms; it is constructive criticism that shows the way forward, every time an error is pointed out it leads to a correction, and I have lost count of the number of revisions I have done but, when all errors are removed the truth remains and I remain convinced (by constructive debate) that I am somewhere near the truth. PS It amused me somewhat to realize that I was giving people like insane-alien 'marching orders' 35 years before he was a twinkle in his old man's eye; but, Like all of us, he will mature in time.

The following extracts show that the experts do not agree with your statements: http://chemistry.about.com/od/periodictableelements/a/periodictrends.htm The properties of the elements exhibit trends. These trends can be predicted using the periodic table and can be explained and understood by analyzing the electron configurations http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_are_isoelectronic_species The elements, which are isoelectronic with each other, differ in their chemical and physical properties, My table shows how the electron configuration determines the chemical properties of the elements.

Embarrassingly I have to admit to an error in copying data from column to column in Excel. Please ignore this submission. My sincere apologies to big314mp

Electronegativity. Electronegativity is found by experiment and interpreted as shown on: http://www.chemguide.co.uk/atoms/bonding/electroneg.html There is, as far as we are aware; no theoretical mathematical formula. Fortunately there are two sequences in the Table of Elements on: http://69.5.17.59/et1.pdf That is sufficiently similar in structure to produce a theoretical mathematical formula as shown in the table. Col. (d) shows that the values produced by the equation: r/(1/e) r = atomic radius e = electronegativity produces the same values for both sequences of elements; demonstrating that electronegativity is inversely proportional to the atomic radius. The table can be found on: http://69.5.17.59/et_electronegativity.pdf

The aim is to construct a Table of Elements that demonstrates atomic structure. This is done by dividing the electron shells in half and listing the number of electrons in each half. Where there are an odd number of shells the middle shell is divided equally between the inner and outer halves. Elements 1H and 2He are the only single (1s) shell elements; the 1s shell consists of nuclear electrons and therefore not divisible into ‘inner’ and ‘outer’. This causes 1H and 2He to form a separate ‘unconventional’ group being the only group that does not begin with an Alkali metal. The first graph shows all the elements, interpretation is done using an enlargement (second graph) of the first 36 elements (four shells); interpreted as follows: At the beginning of each group the Alkali metal has just one electron in its outer shell creating a large gap on the electron ‘surface’. As each electron is added the gap closes increasing the Casimir force in the gap between electrons. At the smallest gap where the Casimir force is at its greatest (MCF on graph), we find the highly corrosive elements of the Halogen group. Adding one more electron closes the gap creating the inert (i.e. no Casimir force) Noble gases with no gaps between electrons. With one electron less than the corrosive Halogens are the less corrosive Metalloids with a slightly larger gap between electrons. This leads to the conclusion that it is the Casimir force between electrons that determines the nature of the elements. A pdf file (all tables etc) is available at: http://69.5.17.59/et1amdd.pdf

An improved version is on: http://69.5.17.59/et1amdd.pdf the full article will be transferred to this page soon.

He did, he told me I was doing it all wrong that I needed to start from the particle level instead of observing space. On the 28 Dec I became involved in a debate with some academics on why Fluorine (9Fl) is the most corrosive of elements while Neon (10Ne) is inert. But one retired academic insisted on discussing gravity. As part of the gravity debate, I pointed out that if gravitons exist (I think they do), then observed gravity is only possible if the number of gravitons in infinity is both infinite and constant. After 11/2 hours of debate no one had broken down my propositions on either subject. On the basis of that discussion I would recommend that you start with the graviton, but do not expect to much; my attempts to do so on forums have met with rejection and silence but, at least for the present I have a few professionals who are providing the constructive criticism needed to improve presentation. Always keep in mind the words of Isaac Newton who started the debate; "the universe is a thing of great simplicity" and "perhaps the universe is corpuscular in nature". Any solution that is neither 'simple' nor 'corpuscular' should be seriously challenged.

I have posted a novel arrangement of the elements on: http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=38485 This has not passed peer review so should be regarded as speculation at present; however I would like to have some comment on the arrangement.

Earlier articles on the Constant Linear Force model have dealt with the structure of the elementary particle based on a balanced vacuum field together with the equation: mr = FL m = mass r = radius FL = Linear Force Constant The aim of this article is to demonstrate how a Table of Elements would appear in the CLF model. The structure of each atom is viewed as a balanced vacuum field where, because the opposing internal/external vacuum fields are equal and opposite; the table is constructed by dividing the electron shell into two quantities either side of the centre of the shells as shown in the Table 1 on page 3. Where there are an odd number of electron shells, the electrons of the central shell are divided equally between the inner and outer electron shells; these are shown in underlined heavy type. Table 2 (page 4) is used to construct the Table of Elements shown on page 2. Cols. F and G are shown in graph form in Figs. 1 and 2 respectively (page 7). Fig. 1 demonstrates that the compression within each shell has a common point of origin. Fig. 2 demonstrates how the distance between electron centres decreases with each increase in shell compression. Each shell is similar in structure to the so-called ‘2’ dimensional plane found in Fractional Quantum Hall Effect experiments. Fractions similar to those found in FQHE experiments can be produced by comparing Electron Binding Energy of the shell with the EBE of the nuclear (1s) electrons: 2s/1s = shell fraction A graph of 2s fractions (reduced to approximate fractions for comparison with FQHE fractions) is shown in Fig. 3 (page 8). This is interpreted as showing that in the first 10 elements as the shell is constructed the gap between electrons is reduced causing the Casimir effect to operate in the gap between electrons. This causes fluorine, shown in orange) to be the most corrosive of the elements; its atoms having the greatest Casimir force. Noble gases are those elements where the electrons of the outer electron shell have neither gaps nor vortices. Thereafter the particles are compressed as in FQHE experiments creating vortexes with a central (vortex) vacuum. Alkali metals are those elements where the electrons of the outer shell are at the highest possible compression state producing vortexes with the incompressible fractions found in FQHE experiments. Tables and supporting diagrams referred to above can be found on: http://69.5.17.59/et1.pdf

For twenty years I have been developing a theory of particle structure based on a single elementary particle and a single elementary force. When I thought that I had something fit for publication a paper was submitted to the European Journal of Physics and was dismissed with the phrase 'this is not science’ . Science Forums dismissed it as ‘speculation and numerology’ and Physics Forums summed up their rejection with ‘your paper does not contain anything that is new, you have not said anything that is not already well known’. None of the three were prepared to give or debate the reasons behind these comments. Subsequent conversations with academics at a social gathering made me realize that what my work needed was at least one convincing argument, I decided to research atomic structure. The following article will form the foundation of my next submission; before that, your constructive criticism would be much appreciated. Table of Elements Earlier articles on the Constant Linear Force model have dealt with the structure of the elementary particle. The aim of this article is to demonstrate a CLF Table of Elements. The structure of each atom is viewed as a balanced vacuum field where, because the opposing internal/external vacuum fields are equal and opposite; the table is constructed by dividing the electron shell into two quantities either side of the centre of the shells as shown in the Table 1 on page 2. Where there are an odd number of electron shells, the electrons of the central shell are divided equally between the inner and outer electron shells; these are shown in underlined heavy type. Table 1 is used to construct the Table of Elements shown on page 8 (An enlarged version is available on pages 9 and 10). The table of Elements demonstrates that the cause of atomic structure can be attributed to two actions: Compression: (2 dimensional compressions as in FQHE experiments) each increase in electron numbers causes a reduction in atomic radius. The cause of this reduction is the increase in linear vacuum force (in the CLF model, the linear vacuum force of negative charge particles is greater that the linear anti-vacuum force). Expansion: When the atomic radius in one Expansion State is reduced to nearly the minimum atomic radius of the next lower Expansion State, further compression is impossible and a new Expansion State is begun; but, in the Sixth Expansion State the increase in vacuum force (over anti-vacuum force) is sufficient to force the existing shells to undergo temporary compaction (3 dimensional compression) making the atom concerned radioactive, forcing the atom to emit particles until the compaction is relaxed. (See highlighted values). Table 2 (pages 5,6 and 7) lists the even denominator fractions found when r/2 is divided by the number of electrons in the outer shell(s). FQHE experiments produce fractions with odd number denominators; the cause of this difference is explained in the diagram on page 11. Wave related fractions of FQHE experiments are approximate fractions. Wave related fractions of atomic structure are exact fractions. As this is a Classical theory; the terms used in (FQHE) Quantum theory do not apply, it is only necessary for both theories to produce compatible results, in this case, in the form of wavelength fractions. Interpolating the missing fractions and using the fraction together with the number of electrons in the outer shells allows the prediction of the missing radii for 78Pt, 86Rn, and 87Fr (italic, underlined). My apologies, I cannot get images to transfer from URL; until this is sorted out please use Tables and diagrams on: http://69.5.17.59/et1.pdf

1. Current knowledge of electronegativity is given on: <http://www.meta-synthesis.com/webbook/36_eneg/electroneg.html> Where the most popular values are described in the following manner: Pauling's empirical electronegativity scale is derived from thermochemical bond-energy data 2. Details of 2-dimensional fractions found in composite fermion theory are describe by Jainendra K Jain in his book 'Composite Fermions'. 3. For current bonding theories see especially(especially bond lengths): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_bond#Electrons_in_chemical_bonds 4. On a the forum found at: http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=32854&page=2 Will be found the arguments for 3-dimnensional fractions constructed using the Electron Bonding Energies of atoms. Table 1 is taken from an earlier submission (4) concerning Composite fermion fractions where the fractions are 'approximations' (Jain). Table 2 shows that the vortex width is approximately 1/2 of the longitudinal axis width. Table 1 Table 2 The next stage is to show that in the 3-dimensdional frame of particles and atoms it is again the particle fraction that determines the atomic bond length; but first it is necessary to determine the cause of particle bonding. Electronegativity Of the three tables of electronegativity listed by Emsley, two have some similarity as shown in Fig, 1 Fig.1 Pauling and Allred electronegativity values are derived from chemical bonding; where the use of more than one atom fails to describe the action within each individual atom. Action within single atoms can de deduced using the EBE fractions that is: EBE of s2 (shell) electrons divided by the EBE of s1 (nuclear) electrons. (Fig.2 ) Fig.2 The fractions either side of atomic No. 10 increase in opposite directions. In Table 3 the fractions to the left of atomic No.10 are extended (shown highlighted) by following Laughlin's example of using an ansatz. Table 3 The 2s shell electron approximate fractions (predicted and actual) are shown in Fig.3 Fig.3 Without S2 electrons, the two nuclear electrons do not form fractions. The single S2 electron of element 1 does not wrap around the nucleus, it bonds in meson style, therefore the high electronegativity value of element 1 does not equate with a high bonding value. From elements 2 to 9 (inclusive) the gap between electrons narrows increasing the Casimir force (vacuum bonding) until the gap closes at element 10. From element 11 to element 92 the S2 electrons are subject to compression (vortex) bonding. Element 9 (Fluorine [shown in yellow in Fig.3 and red in Fig.4]) has the greatest Casimir force and is, for that reason; the most corrosive of all the elements. Fig.4 shows elements 1 to 15 electronegativity in greater detail. Fig.4 Bond lengths. Note: A conversion factor of 8.551 converts (decimal) fractions to pm. Bond lengths are found by adding together the s2 EBE fractions for each element of the bonding pair (Table 4). Fig. 5A shows the results in graph form. Fig. 5B shows the percentage variation between Pauling's empirical values and EBE fraction values. Because the variation is large, Fig. 5C is produced to show the variation between two widely accepted values for bond lengths, one by Pauling and one by Sanderson. Comparing B with C it will be seen that the EBE fractions differ from Pauling by roughly one half of the difference between Sanderson and Pauling (note difference in scale). Table 2 provides the data for Fig. 5A Fig.5 Table 4 Atomic electrons are compressed on the atomic radius in the fractional sequence 1/5, 1/6, 1/7, 1/8, 1/9 etc. In FQHE Laughlin found the sequence 1/5, 1/7, 1/9 etc. Laughlin did not find fractions with an even denominator for the reasons given in my earlier submission (4). But it is shown that the fractions found in the 2-dimensional frame of FQHE experiments are the same as the fractions found in the 3-dimensional (atomic) frame. It is also shown that atomic pair bond length is the sum of the s2 electron fractions of each member of the pair. Postscript 13 Dec 2008 To the above can be added the table below, it shows how in molecules an increasing number of particles resists compression; In FQHE experiments a similar effect is achieved by increasing the magnetic pressure (hence the approximate fractions). Col. g is a measure of the reduction in the width of the so-called '2-dimensional' band.

swansont Just like 7 + 1 = 8, and the fractional increase is 1/8 of 8. It's basic math, nothing more. What you appear to have done is arrange them in some order and found the fractional difference in mass. If one had a mass about twice the other, you'd identify it as a fraction of 1/2. There's no physics here. It's numerology, data mining, since it's all done after-the-fact. Expressing ratios will yield fractions. You can do the same thing with the change in your pocket. Are a quarter and nickel elementary particles because their ratio is 1/5? So you just find the nearest fraction that works? And since any two numbers can be expressed as a fraction, you will always be able to find a fraction, even if the numbers end up being wrong. Completely ad-hoc. The ad hoc-i-ness is blocking the truthiness. Your system appears to be just as ad-hoc as Titus-Bode, which has never been shown to be anything more than a perhaps interesting coincidence for some planets, but without any underlying physical basis. The following is an attempt to reply to the above: In high mobility semiconductor heterojunctions the integer quantum Hall effect (IQHE) plateaux are much narrower than for lower mobility samples. Between these narrow IQHE more plateaux are seen at fractional filling factors, especially 1/3 and 2/3. This is the fractional quantum Hall effect (FQHE) whose discovery in 1982 was completely unexpected. In 1998 the Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded to Dan Tsui and Horst Stormer, the experimentalists who first observed the FQHE, jointly with Robert Laughlin who suceeded in explaing the result in terms of new quantum states of matter. Pasted from <http://www.warwick.ac.uk/~phsbm/fqhe.htm> Jain states that the fractions are approximations. Using atomic shell electrons, where electrons orbit at right angle to the magnetic bonding field we observe that the plateaux are peculiar to the approximations; that is to say that the plateaux are not present when the actual fractions are calculated from the Electron Bonding Energies; but they are present when the actual fractions are converted into approximations by reducing the numerator to a single digit . The figure shows the fractional quantum Hall effect in a GaAs-GaAlAs heterojunction, recorded at 30mK. Also included is the diagonal component of resistivity, which shows regions of zero resistance corresponding to each FQHE plateau. The principle series of fractions that have been seen are listed below. They generally get weaker going from left to right and down the page: o 1/3, 2/5, 3/7, 4/9, 5/11, 6/13, 7/15... o 2/3, 3/5, 4/7, 5/9, 6/11, 7/13... o 5/3, 8/5, 11/7, 14/9... o 4/3, 7/5, 10/7, 13/9... o 1/5, 2/9, 3/13... o 2/7, 3/11... o 1/7.... (The fractional quantum Hall effect (FQHE) is concerned centrally with filling factor. This is usually writen as the greek letter nu, or v due to the limitations of HTML.) Pasted from <http://www.warwick.ac.uk/~phsbm/fqhe.htm> Atomic electron shell fractions are less than 1. By restricting the debate to fractions with a value of less than 1 the following table explains the cause of the fractional sequences: All tests of Laughlin's wave function have shown it to be correct. The difficulty that arises is in accounting for all the other fractions at v=p/q where p>1 and simple wavefunctions can not be written down. It is also necessary to explain why q is always odd. Pasted from <http://www.warwick.ac.uk/~phsbm/fqhe.htm> Compression of the transverse axis reduces the wavelength of the single longitudinal (vacuum) wave. Compression of the longitudinal axis reduces the number of (matter) waves on the longitudinal axis. Reducing both axis in a single (FQHE) experiment, produces the highlighted sequences. There are two reasons why 3/8, 5/8 and 5/12 are not observed, one is that experimenters have not compressed the transverse axis below 1/7; and the second is that the compressed sequence containing two of the fractions, starts with an even number denominator 1/4, 3/8, 5/12 (see explanation below). The weakest QHE compressed state is shown above, it is to weak to be found by experiment. Experimentally the compressed states are closer to the compression shown below; in the two dimensional frame the lower particles are remove by the magnetic flux leaving the observer with only odd denominator fractions. (The 1/2 was found in composite fermion experiments after publication of the Warwick paper. It does so because it is the only even denominator fraction in both longitudinal and transverse sequences [i.e it is not squeezed out]). Correction: In the Table of irreducible fractions the term 'radius' should of course read 'diameter' or 'axis'.

Why should Pluto's status matter? It's not like anyone claims that Newton's gravitational force doesn't apply to it because it's not a planet. The entry of a stray planet into the solar system alters both the gravity field structure and creates interference in the wave structure. Gravitational changes occur at the speed of light; but adjustment to the wave structure depends on the quantity of matter in the system, the greater the quantity of matter the longer it takes the wave system to adjust. The strong, electromagnetic and gravity forces are caused by the vacuum force acting on different density states of matter. As the wave structure is determined by the relationship between vacuum force and anti-vacuum force, the mathematics of wave structure is common to all three forces. A) The sum of the fraction on the longitudinal axis and the fraction on the transverse axis = 1. B) When the system has no weak density particles (i.e. gravitons) between particles of a high density state (i.e. particles that are not gravitons) compression on the short axis occurs in the maximum compression sequence 1/3, 1/4, 1/5 etc. (zero vacuum compression factor) C) Within a system with weak density particles between particles of a higher density where compression is caused by a central mass the fraction sequence of the wave structure is the single compression factor sequence 1/3, 2/5, 3/7 etc. D) Where the wave system is compressed between an inner and outer mass the fractional wave sequence is the double compression factor sequence 1/2, 2/3, 3/4, etc. Your system appears to be just as ad-hoc as Titus-Bode, which has never been shown to be anything more than a perhaps interesting coincidence for some planets, but without any underlying physical basis. We have shown that the wave structure originates from the relationship between vacuum field and the anti-vacuum field (matter). It is common to all natural force fields as shown by both experiment and observation. Experimental results and data found by observation have been collated into a single table that explains the structural relationship between the fractional sequences found by Hall, Tsui and Laughlin and the observed spin width. The theory is fully causal.

Inserted early doodle instead of final result, my apologies; The correct table and graph are shown below: Clearly the fractional distance between Pluto and Neptune is 1/4 not the predicted 1/3. However the status of Pluto is unclear, some argue that it is not a true planet; some think that it was not part of the original solar system but was a later capture. Finally it should be remembered that Pluto does not orbit it the same plane as the other planets. Until the true nature of Pluto is determined we cannot explain its fractional position. One possible novel solution might be found in the recent discovery of a captured planet way beyond the orbit of Pluto; it is possible that this ‘recent’ capture is altering the solar wave structure from the outside inwards; a process that will take many millions of years to complete. The ad hoc-i-ness is blocking the truthiness. AD HOC - DONE FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ONLY Surely that is true of the whole of Quantum physics which is for the purpose of prediction. My work is for the purpose of interpretation. My proposals only disagree with QT on points of interpretation, there is no argument about the mathematics of prediction. QT seeks mathematical perfection, but nature is not a perfect system but rather it is a system of constantly changing sub-systems. It's hard to say for sure because you present way too much data without explanation I will try expanding the explanations. PS: I do not receive email notifications of replies, can this omission be corrected please.