The Magnetic Atom

[navyrob]

**EDIT: Please move this to the Speculation forum**

-

Hello. I would like to share with you a theory I have been working on for some time now. I am not a professional physicist so please, bear with some of the simplified terms I use in this abbreviated summary.

-

I have developed a new atomic model that is completely different from the Bohr atomic model that we learned in high school, but at the same time nearly identical (more on this later). I call it The Magnetic Atom. With these magnetic atoms I can unite all forces into one force. I can also unite all particles of matter i.e. electrons, protons and neutrons into one particle. Sub atomic particles such as quarks and leptons are easily understood and explained as well. I do all of this by using a particle that you are all familiar with, the photon, and a particle that quantum physics "allows for the existence of" called a magnetic monopole. You don't need a PhD to understand magnetic monopoles, or any other part of this theory. All you need is a basic understanding of the Bohr atom and an open mind.

-

What is a magnetic monopole according to this theory? Quite simply, it is the force carrying particle of magnetism. There are two types of magnetic monopoles North Pole particles and South Pole particles, and they always exist in pairs. The pairs of particles are perfectly balanced so that total polarity of all stable matter and energy is 0. Thus, the total polarity for the entire universe is 0. In order to easily visualize what magnetic monopoles are consider the following: When you place a permanent magnet into a pile of iron filings, the particles that align the filings are magnetic monopoles.

-

From here on I will refer to magnetic monopoles simply as magnets, because that is what they are. You will see eventually that the iron portion of what today we call a permanent magnet, is not actually the magnet. The iron is just regular matter that has s special arrangement of atoms that allow it to stably hold extra magnets. In the future we will see a permanent magnet for what it truly is - a battery.

-

The entire universe can be explained using only two things: Magnets and photons. In the universe, there exists an infinite amount of these magnets, and a nearly infinite amount of photons. Photons have a very tiny mass. Magnets are truly massless. Unlike the magnets however, photons have no polarity, they are neutral. because of this, magnets, both North and South, are attracted to the photons. The magnets gather around the photons and create magnetic fields. These magnetic fields will have a total polarity of 0, because there will be even amounts of North and South pole magnets attracted. The more photons in a given volume of empty space, the more magnets will be attracted. The magnets will drag along any photons they have in their fields to areas with more photons. This attraction of smaller groups of photons to larger groups is the basis for all of the forces we observe in the universe.

-

When a critical amount of photons have been gathered together, the magnetic fields they attract become so strong that the photons slow down and collect in groups. These packets of magnetically held in place photons are what we have been calling Protons and Neutrons. One could also define the packets that make up quarks as the elementary building block of matter, but in the interest of simplicity for now we will just say say that our newly defined Neutrons and Protons are the building blocks of all matter.

The magnetic fields that hold the packets of photons into Neutrons and Protons are the Strong Nuclear Force. This magnetic field holds Neutrons and Protons together into the stable nuclear configurations outlined on the Periodic Table. These stable nuclei are the elements, Hydrogen, Iron, Gold etc. The nuclei attract magnets as well, however the stable magnetic field around the nucleus regulates the amount of photons that can be added or removed from the stable nucleus. This is how matter stays in the coherent forms we observe.

-

Outside of the nucleus, magnets that are not holding photons will continue to gather and flow in "streams". The places where these streams intersect will have a large build up of magnets. At a right angle from the large magnetic fields at these intersections you will have an measurable, negative electric field. This electric field is what the Bohr model calls the electron.

-

The Weak Nuclear Force is much more easily explained with magnetic atoms, and it requires no spontaneous transformation of neutrons. Neutrons as you now see are just packets of photons that are completely saturated with magnets. Beta decay is when neutron becomes a proton with a positive charge and an electron with a negative charge according to the Bohr model. What really happens when a neutron "decays" into a proton and electron is the magnetic field that holds the neutron has become disrupted by another, stronger field. The neutron will shed some of its magnets and become "positively charged" because it has enough photons to attract more magnets than are currently influencing it. The magnets that it sheds become a free roaming cluster of magnets with a negative electric charge at a right angle to its field. This packet of magnets will then seek out "positively charged" magnetic fields. This is also why "electricity" flows from negative to positive. The negative charge is an area where you have extra magnets, and the positive charge is an area where you have photons in need of more magnets.

-

So now we have all of the particles and 3 forces explained through the interaction of photons and magnets but what about gravity? To understand gravity consider two objects of different sizes that are near to each other but not touching: a planet and person. The person, (which is really just a collection of photons held in highly complex configurations of photons and magnets) attracts magnets from the surrounding area. Those magnets are also attracted to the planet nearby, and so they move out of the person towards the planet. So there is essentially a river of magnets flowing through the person and on into the planet. The person is dragged along and his body is attracted to the earth with a force that is directly proportional to his mass and the mass of the planet. He also attracts some magnets from the earth to his body, but this attraction is much less, because he has much less mass. And that friends is what gravity is and how it actually works.

-

This is just the beginning. Using this view of the universe I have uncovered the answers to MANY of the mysteries we have in the universe today. From the sub atomic to the galactic, using this basic theory we can unveil the universe and see it for what it truly is. And the things we will discover will both amaze and terrify us. More of this to come. Please let me know what you think.

Edited November 7, 2011 by navyrob

[swansont]

I have developed a new atomic model that is completely different from the Bohr atomic model that we learned in high school, but at the same time nearly identical (more on this later). I call it The Magnetic Atom.

 

The Bohr model is not the goal to which one should aspire. The Bohr model fails to explain several aspects of atomic structure, which means it's wrong. If you have mimicked its results, you have built a broken model.

[Daedalus]

Not that I actually believe this theory to be correct, but what you have sounds a lot like Vernon Brown's photon theory.

[navyrob]

Not that I actually believe this theory to be correct, but what you have sounds a lot like Vernon Brown's photon theory.

 

Thank you very much for that link. Brown has the right of it. Brown sees all matter and energy as light, my theory gives a rudimentary outline for WHY that is.

[mississippichem]

How do you explain the net magnetic dipole moment of the electron? Or the net Coulombic charge on protons/electrons?

 

Spin pairing of electrons in opposite spin states is observed. You must account for this in your model.

[Klaynos]

What quantitative predictions does your idea make about electron orbitals?

[navyrob]

What quantitative predictions does your idea make about electron orbitals?

 

The electron orbits that we are familiar with today are the result of the "latticework" that the magnets travel along around the nucleus. Here is a diagram that shows 3 orbits, what you would call the K,L and M shells. The element in question does not matter, I used a magnetic helium atom in this drawing but it could be iron or gold etc. Atoms are arranged in harmonic patterns that are identical no matter how far you zoom in or out. At the outside each harmonic level you can have an "electron orbit". These are places where free flowing magnetic streams intersect and build up and electric field. Please keep in mind that this is a 2d image and the atoms are actually arranged in 3 dimensional patterns.

 

 

 

And here is another diagram showing what the magnetic atom above looks like up close:

 

 

Edited November 7, 2011 by navyrob

[Klaynos]

And quantitatively how did you find those configurations?

 

Are you picturing these as actual orbits? If so they won't work.

[swansont]

How do you explain hyperfine splitting? What do the excited states look like and what is the angular momentum of the states?

[navyrob]

Here is an update with a few minor corrections about how photons "slow down" and some the beginnings of the larger implications of this idea.

 

EDIT: Dear lord this is the most difficult forum to post anything! I mean why on earth would you set up a forum to automatically delete spaces, tabs and paragraphs?!?!?! Any ways...

 

Just use this tiny paste link... http://tinypaste.com/93de5678

Edited November 19, 2011 by navyrob

[Klaynos]

Can you please see Swansont's and my replies above.

[Fuzzwood]

And now we want proof.

[navyrob]

And now we want proof.

 

I personally believe the proof is in the megalithic ruins of the ancient world, but I don't expect any one here to just take my word for it.

 

I am currently speaking with some marine biologists about the enigmatic magnetite crystals that have been found in the brains of sea turtles (as well as many other animals including humans). Ridley Sea turtles from hundreds of miles away from the shore all seem to somehow "know" when the moon is in the correct phase for them to head to the beach and lay their eggs. If my theory is correct, this magnetite would be sensitive to the variations in Magnetic Current that follows the synodic cycle.

 

Here is a neat article about the magnetite crystals that proves fairly conclusively that the crystals are being made deliberately, and not just some random byproduct of bacteria.

 

http://www.affs.org/...omagnetism.html

Edited November 19, 2011 by navyrob

[mississippichem]

The properties or biological uses of magnetite can't be used as proof of your "magnetic atom". The ferromagnetism of such materials is the result of long range order in the spin states of the unpaired electrons in paramagnetic atoms/ions [in a lattice] and not some inherent property of atoms in general.

 

No alternative atomic model is required as these phenomena are already very well understood.

[navyrob]

The properties or biological uses of magnetite can't be used as proof of your "magnetic atom". The ferromagnetism of such materials is the result of long range order in the spin states of the unpaired electrons in paramagnetic atoms/ions [in a lattice] and not some inherent property of atoms in general.

 

No alternative atomic model is required as these phenomena are already very well understood.

 

Please explain the purpose and function of the magnetite crystals found in the link I posted above.

[swansont]

Please explain the purpose and function of the magnetite crystals found in the link I posted above.

 

That's a question for biology. It is unrelated to the validity of your magnetic atom model.

[navyrob]

That's a question for biology. It is unrelated to the validity of your magnetic atom model.

 

You are missing the point. I am asserting that not only does magnetic current exist all around us, but many species on this planet have developed structures that are SENSITIVE to it!

 

Birds could use the earth's natural patterns magnetic current to navigate over long distances. Salmon could use magnetic current to return form 1000s of miles to their spawning grounds. The turtles I mentioned above could use it to know when to head to the shore to lay eggs.

 

Do you see what I am saying?

[swansont]

You are missing the point. I am asserting that not only does magnetic current exist all around us, but many species on this planet have developed structures that are SENSITIVE to it!

 

Birds could use the earth's natural patterns magnetic current to navigate over long distances. Salmon could use magnetic current to return form 1000s of miles to their spawning grounds. The turtles I mentioned above could use it to know when to head to the shore to lay eggs.

 

Do you see what I am saying?

 

You're putting the cart before the horse. Magnetic fields and the ability to sense them is already part if the accepted theory. It's not evidence in support of a new model unless you can demonstrate that the current model fails in some way. The ability to sense when it's time to lay eggs or which river to choose would not seem to require a new atomic model.

[Ophiolite]

You are missing the point. I am asserting that not only does magnetic current exist all around us, but many species on this planet have developed structures that are SENSITIVE to it!

The orientation and navigation of juvenile alligators: evidence of magnetic sensitivity from Journal of Physiology A, 1984

Tenebrio beetle pupae show a conditioned behavioural response to pulse rotations of a geomagnetic field from Physiological Entomology 2007.

Magnetoreception from Sensory Systems Neuroscience: Fish Physiology, v. 25, Elsevier Inc, pp. 335-374.

 

As this random selection of journal articles shows this is hardly news. And as swansont points out, it certainly does not require a new model of the atom to explain it.

[navyrob]

The orientation and navigation of juvenile alligators: evidence of magnetic sensitivity from Journal of Physiology A, 1984

Tenebrio beetle pupae show a conditioned behavioural response to pulse rotations of a geomagnetic field from Physiological Entomology 2007.

Magnetoreception from Sensory Systems Neuroscience: Fish Physiology, v. 25, Elsevier Inc, pp. 335-374.

 

As this random selection of journal articles shows this is hardly news. And as swansont points out, it certainly does not require a new model of the atom to explain it.

 

None of those articles offer any explanation as to HOW the animals use magnetic fields to navigate. Its all well and good to just accept that they respond to magnets, but I am offering a rudimentary explanation of how the organ actually works. All those articles say is that yes, we are nearly 100% certain that animals use magnets to navigate.

You're putting the cart before the horse. Magnetic fields and the ability to sense them is already part if the accepted theory. It's not evidence in support of a new model unless you can demonstrate that the current model fails in some way. The ability to sense when it's time to lay eggs or which river to choose would not seem to require a new atomic model.

Again, what I want to know is HOW such animals use magnets. When photons hit the rods and cones of our eyes, highly complex electrical impulses are sent to our brains and this si how we see. But what is the equivalent of the rods and cones for the magnetic sense and how does it work?

 

And getting off the subject of turtles for a second, another major mystery that is explained with magnetic atoms is HOW matter transforms into energy. In my theory matter and energy are not only equivalent, they are literally the same particle (photons) under different amounts of magnetic field influence. WHen a photon is free roaming we call it energy, when a photon is made to spin in place we call it matter.

 

Im sure you are all familiar with atomic weight and the concept of "binding energy". Under the current model we have no real understanding of how nucleons lose mass when they combine to form the elements on the periodic table. When you begin to think of Neutrons as collections of photons however, its easy to picture them shedding some photons as their magnetic fields link together.

Edited November 21, 2011 by navyrob

[swansont]

Im sure you are all familiar with atomic weight and the concept of "binding energy". Under the current model we have no real understanding of how nucleons lose mass when they combine to form the elements on the periodic table. When you begin to think of Neutrons as collections of photons however, its easy to picture them shedding some photons as their magnetic fields link together.

 

Why is it easier to picture photon emission with a magnetic force than with a nuclear force? The known and observed magnetic force that does not behave very much at all like the nuclear force, plus all the other properties that neutrons have that would be hard to explain with a collection of photons (e.g. the half-integral spin). For me that's much harder to imagine. But what one can imagine is not the standard by which one advances a theory. It is the extent to which the theory models observed behavior. That people do not understand or can't imagine the finer points of an atomic model based on quantum mechanics does not make it wrong. It's wrong if it does not match up with observation. In that regard, it is not wrong. It's quite good.

[navyrob]

I dont really see why spin cannot be explained via a magnetic atom. If anything, you get a model that is a lot more flexible in terms of what the particles are capable of. Also magnetic tunneling is easy to comprehend as well. The magnets exist in a series of freeze frames as I mentioned, and they can move instantly to adapt to changes in local photon arrangements.

 

Again, I am not trying to discount the last 100 years of observation, I am only trying to give a better understanding of what the particles are made of. They still behave exactly how we have been observing.

Edited November 21, 2011 by navyrob

[insane_alien]

None of those articles offer any explanation as to HOW the animals use magnetic fields to navigate. Its all well and good to just accept that they respond to magnets, but I am offering a rudimentary explanation of how the organ actually works. All those articles say is that yes, we are nearly 100% certain that animals use magnets to navigate.

 

By being able to detect the direction of the magnetic field, they can ensure that the keep a straight line (well, not exactly straight but following a curve around the pole.

 

The ability to travel in a straight line is of immense use when travelling large distances.

 

Also, it is reasonable to suggest that there would be magnetic landmarks which could also aid navigation.

 

basically, they navigate the same way you would if you had a compass (but no map). set a bearing and go for it.

 

Im sure you are all familiar with atomic weight and the concept of "binding energy". Under the current model we have no real understanding of how nucleons lose mass when they combine to form the elements on the periodic table. When you begin to think of Neutrons as collections of photons however, its easy to picture them shedding some photons as their magnetic fields link together.

 

yes we do. just because you haven't bothered to research it doesn't mean its not there.

[swansont]

I dont really see why spin cannot be explained via a magnetic atom. If anything, you get a model that is a lot more flexible in terms of what the particles are capable of. Also magnetic tunneling is easy to comprehend as well. The magnets exist in a series of freeze frames as I mentioned, and they can move instantly to adapt to changes in local photon arrangements.

 

Again, I am not trying to discount the last 100 years of observation, I am only trying to give a better understanding of what the particles are made of. They still behave exactly how we have been observing.

 

Photons are spin-1. How do you get a spin-1/2 neutron with a bunch of photons?

 

The threshold isn't just explaining one phenomenon — the current model explains spin. A new model has to explain all of the previous model and either do it better, or have it address new behavior that isn't already explained/predicted.