A GUT Solution

[MomentTheory]

UPDATE: After receiving information from Mordered, I've concluded that this is incorrect. My original thought was to go with bosons +w -w and z, but I am not familiar enough with bosons and their calculations to draw such a conclusion.

GUT predicts that at the physically unattainable GeV limit; quarks, electrons, and all matter are the same.

This solution is like working backwards, using speed of C instead of energy acceleration to attain the same effect.

1 Red, blue, or green quark = √E/M = C, where C replaces the energy needed for the GeV limit of a particle accelerator @ the plotted point of Zz, (49th reflection when traversing through parallel glass), thought to be caused by interference. When Zz^3, (achieved by 3 light trajectories); this creates the triple integer spin needed for a complete rgb = white quark= 1proton. The trapped photons, no longer capable of attaining C to reveal the newly created proton, by law of thermodynamics reduce to the next stage, electrical current.

This is based upon the fact that light holds to a perfect 45 degree angle, when traversing a parallel reflector. The diagonal of the square is √2, validating the usage of √E/M = C, where the mirrors are mass, the photons are the energy, and √2 is the trajectory of the virtual particles.

Edited January 31, 2015 by MomentTheory

[physica]

To be honest I'm a bit confused as to what you're saying here. It seems a bit of a ramble, could you clarify the point you want to discuss? We could also start basic, do you know how to accelerate a charged particle?

[MomentTheory]

Negative rep for this? Already!? Seriously!? Thanks, you guys are the best.

 

Anyway, its not a ramble and yea I can clarify. I've been doing some experiments with light and mirrors, and I found a constant point of interference that occurs at the 49th reflection, trapping the light, every time. Because of this constant, we can use it to our advantage to bypass the need of a particle accelerator to modify quarks using the speed of C in place of energy, for acceleration. Because the theoretical GeV limit can not be surpassed with a particle accelerator (unless it were as big as our solar system), we can assume that there must be another way to achieve this, if the GUT is correct in its prediction.

Following the characteristics of quarks, they can not exist as a single unit but must be in a triplet bond of RED BLUE and GREEN to create a white quark which defaults as a proton. When light becomes trapped by its own limitation, (at point Zz), we can assume the extra energy not being expended by the photons will cause an integer spin of +1 on a single quark. By forcing 3 sources of light into a single point (Zz^3) this provides a +3 spin, freeing a whole unit of an RBG quark, producing a proton. Since the proton is trapped by its own mass and gravity, and the light can not escape due to interference, this will create a flow of electrons at an infinite zero-point rate as predicted by GUT.

 

Since light naturally lends itself to following a 45 degree angle down parallel reflections, it can be said to travel the constant trajectory of √2 (the diagonal of a square) which just so happens to make up a constant 45 degree turn. Therefore using E=MC^2 we can flip this equation to isolate the speed and also define the path that light travels, as √E/M=C. Once C is isolated across energy mass and trajectory, we can harness the speed of light.

My next step is to build such a unit capable of testing this. If it works, free energy exists, if it doesn't the GUT is incorrect and we shall never see a result beyond the size of quarks unless we build a bigger particle accelerator capable of exceeding the GeV limit.

That is my hypothesis, not sure why I got negative rep for this since this is speculations thread, aren't we here to help each other?

Edited January 31, 2015 by MomentTheory

[Bignose]

using the speed of C in place of energy, for acceleration

It's phrases like this that lead to negative rep.

 

"speed of C". Firstly, the nomenclature is usually a lowercase c. Secondly, it is the speed of light. Light != c.

 

But both of those are very minor compared to the next two I've got. Thirdly, you can't use a speed in the place of energy. length per time (speed) is not the same as mass times length squared over time squared. Fourthly, you can't use a speed or an energy for acceleration. Neither length per time nor mass time length squared over time squared is the same as a length over time squared.

 

All of the rest don't really follow either. You didn't actually clarify. You repeated a lot. The link between sqrt(2) and E = mc^2 seems little more than the fact that they both have a 2 in them. The supposed fact about 49 reflections is easily disputed (someone brought up fiber-optic cables as an easy counterexample). You just chose to ignore them in your other thread.

 

All of the above maybe follow logically in your mind, but the skipping around does come across as, said above, rambling. You need to fill in a lot more steps if you expect us to take something meaningful from it.

 

My next step is to build such a unit capable of testing this.

I will say, however, that I am pleased to see this written. A very rigorous and objective test would be much appreciated. Objective evidence would help support what you're saying, and probably would help clarify exactly what you mean as well.

[physica]

For the record I have given you a positive rep for your enthusiasm. I've seen your video and you put a lot of effort into it. I don't think that should be discouraged. However, I'm not going to pretend that I'm too excited about the content. I know you don't want to hear this and I'm going to come across as dismissive but I recommend that you take some formal study in physics and reach for low hanging fruit first. Many teachers would love to have a student that would put the effort your putting in. The problem is that you have to learn the boring basics first. I'm getting the impression that you're not too clued up on quantum mechanics. You need to make sure that your measurements are statistically significant. Physicists with phds and great understanding are using particle accelerators and doing hundreds of thousands of collisions a day for years to get statistically significant data, they need supercomputers etc to make this happen.

 

we can assume the extra energy not being expended by the photons will cause an integer spin of +1 on a single quark. By forcing 3 sources of light into a single point (Zz^3) this provides a +3 spin, freeing a whole unit of an RBG quark, producing a proton.

How can we assume this? Do you realise that spin is a probabilistic prediction? Have you calculated the probabilities of 3 positive spins happening?

 

The units bignose has highlighted is also a warning sign. I don't want to sound derogatory but units is very basic maths. If you want some help learning physics with some ideas on how to run experiments that will concrete your understanding then there are loads of people here who would love to help you. As for your current project I'd be dishonest if I encouraged you to pursue it.

[MomentTheory]

It would be wonderful if I could afford formal training but alas, that is never going to happen haha.

 

I'll be honest too. I don't really care about the correct notation of C vs c, yea I know you all are very picky about that here, and I will attempt to tighten up my usage for the sake of this website, but for my own purposes, it seems senseless to worry about such trivial things when I know what I am referencing too. Perhaps I'm taking too much for granted, my apologies. I have made clear observations and have tested my own limits, learning what I need to know to get this far. You'll have to forgive me or get over it. (I'm not being a dick, just honest)

 

I'm using c in place of energy because it is the infinite cap, it's already traveling at an infinite rate, thus I am assuming that light can be the only thing that can bypass the GeV limit of our current running particle accelerators.

 

I did not choose to ignore the part about fiber optics, I disregarded it because I am not testing infinite light reflections, (I believe I did point that out in an earlier thread) I'm testing the geometry of light as it passes through a glass medium. Fiber optic cables work in a completely different manner.

 

Even the thought experiment involving an infinite parallel mirror is impossible to test due to the inability to produce a perfect mirror on a molecular level, and the curvature of the earth, and if you will space-time. Therefore it is an assumption that light can travel forever in this manner even though as far as we can observe, it does.

 

I understand what you are getting at in regards to my incorrect usage of units, but what I have observed is a clear alpha and omega of light, since the unit I am measuring is self contained, it does not revolve around distance or time as it is in a constant motion of c. Ergo, my usage of √E/M=C.

 

The spin calculation, is an assumption, but it is based upon the fact that regardless of milli-wattage of the laser, the omega still occurs at 49 reflections, so it is a prediction that the extra energy must be going somewhere, creating spin in the lowest possible category of units, quarks.

 

I'm not claiming to disprove the work of the physicist using particle accelerators, merely purposing an alternative to their efforts based on my observation of light's geometry. c/n should stand out as a clear way to beat the speed of light. If the only other controller of light is in fact n, then logically, modifying n, is the only way to get around its limitation.

 

I'm not sure if I posted this yet or not but here is the data I have collected in a graph to show what I have observed thus far, perhaps it will help clarify what I mean.

Edited January 31, 2015 by MomentTheory

[Mordred]

GUT predicts that at the physically unattainable GeV limit; quarks, electrons, and all matter are the same.

This solution is like working backwards, using speed of C instead of energy acceleration to attain the same effect.

1 Red, blue, or green quark = √E/M = C, where C replaces the energy needed for the GeV limit of a particle accelerator @ the plotted point of Zz, (49th reflection when traversing through parallel glass), thought to be caused by interference. When Zz^3, (achieved by 3 light trajectorieus); this creates the triple integer spin needed for a complete rgb = white quark= 1proton. The trapped photons, no longer capable of attaining C to reveal the newly created proton, by law of thermodynamics reduce to the next stage, electrical current.

Let's stop right here GUT is not restricted to quarks and how they combine. Quarks describe the strong force. Photons is the electromagnet force. W and Z bosons is the weak force.

 

GUT specifically covers how these three forces become indistinguishable from one another as you increase the temperature. This is a state of thermodynamics equilibrium.

 

To reach this you must calculate the coupling constants of each force. This is often termed Running of the coupling constants.

 

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coupling_constant

 

A coupling constant Is the strength of a force (interaction part) compared to its kinetic energy part or another interaction part.

 

 

Now lets look at the makeup of photons. Note on this page photons is an elementary particle, it is not made up of quarks. The color of each quark has nothing to do with how it interacts with light.

 

a quarks color represents its charge. As there is Three color charges. The allowable combinations must follow the conservation of color rules. Which how they combine must be white or colorless. This however is how the color charges add up and has to do with charge conservation not the photon interactions. Color charge isn't electromagnetic. Electromagnetic charge positive and negative is carried by photons particle to particle. The color charge is carried by quarks and gluons.

 

 

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_charge

 

Google the eightfold wayen for more details.

 

 

 

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eightfold_Way_(physics)

 

as far as GUT here is a few good guides

 

http://arxiv.org/pdf/0904.1556.pdf The Algebra of Grand Unified Theories John Baez and John Huerta

 

http://pdg.lbl.gov/2011/reviews/rpp2011-rev-guts.pdf GRAND UNIFIED THEORIES

 

For high energy particle physics in terms of thermodynamics

http://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/0503203.pdf "Particle Physics and Inflationary Cosmology" by Andrei Linde

http://www.wiese.itp.unibe.ch/lectures/universe.pdf:" Particle Physics of the Early universe" by Uwe-Jens Wiese Thermodynamics, Big bang Nucleosynthesis

 

The first is a full length textbook.

 

as far as particle physics textbooks

 

Introductory to particle physics by Griffith is a good introduction book.

 

However arxiv has one available for free

 

http://arxiv.org/abs/0810.3328

A Simple Introduction to Particle Physics

 

Part 2 is here

http://arxiv.org/abs/0908.1395

Edited January 31, 2015 by Mordred

[MomentTheory]

Thank you for the abundance of information. It's helpful considering I'm trying to self educate.

 

Actually very helpful because I wasn't sure if I should be focusing on the strong or weak force. Now I know what I have to correct! My first thought was to use the W and Z bosons in this model (since z boson is the "smallest"), but I made the mistake of thinking because of the color charge that it would be related to light, but I now see my folly in that instance.

Now to read, and then back to the drawing board. Thanks!

Edited January 31, 2015 by MomentTheory