Inside a Gluon

[Bengt E Nyman]

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.

 

[ACG52]

Is there a point to all this unattributed cut and paste?

[Bengt E Nyman]

Is there a point to all this unattributed cut and paste?

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.

Edited October 18, 2015 by Bengt E Nyman

[ACG52]

Right, no point. Just nonsense.

[swansont]

!

Moderator Note

Any math to back this up? Any specific predictions you can make, so that you follow the guidelines for discussion? IOW, are your simulations the result of math, or are they just animated drawings?

[Bengt E Nyman]

!

Moderator Note

Any math to back this up? Any specific predictions you can make, so that you follow the guidelines for discussion? IOW, are your simulations the result of math, or are they just animated drawings?

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.

Edited October 18, 2015 by Bengt E Nyman

[swansont]

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.

 

What kinetic energy do the protons have in the scattering simulation?

[Sensei]

2D Special collision between 2 protons producing Fusion and Strong Force

 

 

You probably don't know, but fusion of two protons produce positron and neutrino, and release 420 keV energy...

 

[math]p^+ + p^+ \rightarrow D^+ + e^+ + v_e + 0.42 MeV[/math]

[swansont]

 

You probably don't know, but fusion of two protons produce positron and neutrino, and release 420 keV energy...

 

[math]p^+ + p^+ \rightarrow D^+ + e^+ + v_e + 0.42 MeV[/math]

 

Indeed. There is no bound state of two protons, so if the simulation predicts this, it's wrong.

[Sensei]

Indeed. There is no bound state of two protons, so if the simulation predicts this, it's wrong.

Helium-2 is extremely unstable isotope:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_of_helium#Helium-2_.28diproton.29

 

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.

Do you really carefully rethink it.. ?

 

Are you aware that neutron decays to proton, electron, and anti-neutrino?

 

[math]n^0 \rightarrow p^+ + e^- + \bar{V}_e + 0.782 MeV[/math]

 

Your theory instantly violates Lepton number conservation..

 

If neutron is up,up,up,e-,e-

and after decay one of e- is emitted,

then proton would have to be up,up,up,e- since then beginning.. ???

 

IMHO you don't know quantum physics enough to know the all decay modes of all particles..

Concentrate on filling this gap.

Edited October 18, 2015 by Sensei

[swansont]

 

Helium-2 is extremely unstable isotope:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_of_helium#Helium-2_.28diproton.29

 

Yes, and one which lacks a bound state.

[Bengt E Nyman]

 

You probably don't know, but fusion of two protons produce positron and neutrino, and release 420 keV energy...

 

[math]p^+ + p^+ \rightarrow D^+ + e^+ + v_e + 0.42 MeV[/math]

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.

 

 

Indeed. There is no bound state of two protons, so if the simulation predicts this, it's wrong.

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.

 

Helium-2 is extremely unstable isotope:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_of_helium#Helium-2_.28diproton.29

 

 

Do you really carefully rethink it.. ?

 

Are you aware that neutron decays to proton, electron, and anti-neutrino?

 

[math]n^0 \rightarrow p^+ + e^- + \bar{V}_e + 0.782 MeV[/math]

 

Your theory instantly violates Lepton number conservation..

 

If neutron is up,up,up,e-,e-

and after decay one of e- is emitted,

then proton would have to be up,up,up,e- since then beginning.. ???

 

IMHO you don't know quantum physics enough to know the all decay modes of all particles..

Concentrate on filling this gap.

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.

Edited October 18, 2015 by Bengt E Nyman

[Bengt E Nyman]

Bi-stable strong force mechanism based on interactions between ES constituents in protons as observed in computer simulations, see above posting.

Bi-stable strong force mechanism illustrated for clarity of mechanism shown below:

 

Figure 5: Protons under repulsion.

Figure 6: Protons at the cross over point between repulsion and strong force attraction.

Figure 7: Protons under strong force attraction.

 

Edited October 30, 2015 by Bengt E Nyman

[swansont]

Are you going to answer the questhion about how much KE the protons have in the scattering simulation?

[Bengt E Nyman]

Are you going to answer the questhion about how much KE the protons have in the scattering simulation?

No! The simulations offered are not a study in energy preservation or the details of fission or fusion. The simulations are part of an attempt to communicate a new observation about ES particle behavior. See strong force illustrations above. Feel free to consider that this material goes beyond what we already teach today.

[imatfaal]

!

Moderator Note

 

Start answering questions and engaging with comments - fyg when a comment states you are wrong and gives reasons (like a few of Sensei's do) then you cannot just agree with him / her and move on; if he/she is right then you are wrong and you must either reconcile your idea to this problem through changes or conclude you were mistaken*.

 

Do not respond to this moderation. Report this post if you feel it is unfair

 

 

* Sorry there is a third option - you can show that he/she is wrong. But he/she isn't so that really isn't much of a third option

[Bengt E Nyman]

It's a shame if we can not carry on a conversation where there might be more to be learned about a subject.

[swansont]

No! The simulations offered are not a study in energy preservation or the details of fission or fusion. The simulations are part of an attempt to communicate a new observation about ES particle behavior. See strong force illustrations above. Feel free to consider that this material goes beyond what we already teach today.

 

But I thought you said these were simulations, not just artwork, and that's a parameter that MUST be included in any proper simulation

[Bengt E Nyman]

I do not agree. These are not accelerator collision simulations, these are mathematically correct slow speed collisions showing the behavior of ELECTRICALLY CHARGED particles to show the electrostatic mechanism of repulsion, strong force cross over and strong force. This is not an attempt to repute or compete with main stream science, this is a proposed mechanism of something that has remained unexplained.

Edited October 30, 2015 by Bengt E Nyman

[swansont]

Please explain how you do a collision simulation without knowing the speed or KE involved, and still insist it's a simulation. Are you claiming the software you used did not require that as an input parameter?

[Bengt E Nyman]

The Kinetic Energies are given by the masses and the initial velocities chosen in the simulation. If you open the simulation in Interactive Physics you should be able to see all the parameters. I would very much prefer if you could turn your attention to the proposed hypothesis. I invite you to fault the hypothesis. Especially the fact that this hypothesis explains and calculates strong force and subsequent binding energy in Deuterium to known values.

If you open the simulations in Interactive Physics you should be able to find all the parameters including masses and velocities.

Edited October 30, 2015 by Bengt E Nyman

[Strange]

What is "Interactive Physics"?

Where are the simulations you refer to?

 

Why can't you just provide the data?

[Bengt E Nyman]

1. Interactive Physics is physics and motion simulation software by Design Simulation Technologies. Also used was Newton by DesignSoft.

2. On an off-line computer.

3. Your question is not pertinent to you addressing my question about our hypothesis.

[Strange]

1. Interactive Physics is physics and motion simulation software by Design Simulation Technologies. Also used was Newton by DesignSoft.

 

OK. That's fine. Don't provide a link or anything.

 

But why do you expect people to buy software to get information that you could provide for free?

 

2. On an off-line computer.

 

Then how are we expected to run it? (Assuming we are willing to pay for the privilege.)

 

3. Your question is not pertinent to you addressing my question about our hypothesis.

 

How can anyone address your hypothesis if you refuse to provide any basic quantitative results?

1. Interactive Physics is physics and motion simulation software by Design Simulation Technologies.

 

I tracked down a reseller: 98 Euros. Send me the money and I will buy a copy.

[Bengt E Nyman]

 

OK. That's fine. Don't provide a link or anything.

 

But why do you expect people to buy software to get information that you could provide for free?

 

 

Then how are we expected to run it? (Assuming we are willing to pay for the privilege.)

 

 

How can anyone address your hypothesis if you refuse to provide any basic quantitative results?

 

I tracked down a reseller: 98 Euros. Send me the money and I will buy a copy.

1. I have provided the simulations as well as illustrations to make the results more accessible.

2. No, why should they. I have already provided the simulations.

3. You don't have to run the simulations again, unless you think I am lying to you.

4. I am providing the quantification of binding energy of Deuterium, calculated as a result of the hypothesis. It matches the values given by others.

5. You will get the same results we did. NEUTRAL PARTICLES WITH CHARGED CONSTITUENTS ARE ATTRACTED TO EACH OTHER CAUSING GRAVITY. SIMILARLY CHARGED PARTICLES WITH DIVERSELY CHARGED CONSTITUENTS (LIKE PROTONS) CAN BE FORCED PAST A POINT OF REPULSION CROSS OVER TO FORM E.S. STRONG FORCE BONDS.

6. Now please address the physics aspects of our hypothesis or simply point out that you are not equipped or interested in doing so.

P.S. If you are a physicist with ties to a university or a nuclear agency you already have access to plenty of computing and simulation power. Simulate two hydrogen atoms, or two neutrons, in a new and otherwise empty universe. Choose real world parameters, including charged quarks and electrons, and be prepared to wait. The first time it took me overnight, but I am sure you know how to handle that.

Good luck.

Have fun.

Edited October 30, 2015 by Bengt E Nyman