# Could the GUT be explained by Quarks?

Newton's first law of motion state

"Every object in a state of uniform motion tends to remain in that state of motion unless an external force is applied to it."

Provided there is nothing to apply an external force to a photon then the above law will not be broken, therefore no additional force is required. IT simply follow's the shortist path, where every its journey takes it.

But he has his revenge, with his third law,

"For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. " - Hence the electron............

Using Newton's own laws of motion, proves the existance of electrons by the properties of photon's...........

Now that's an original thought - if I've ever had one.............

John,

The force that is responsible for the long lives of the photons is the electromagnetic force.
The divergence of the electric and magnetic field in vacuum is zero. This means that an electromagnetic field can exist in vacuum without any source.

The interaction of electric and magnetic field in vacuum gives the speed of light as the inverse square root of the product of the permittivity and permeability of vacuum. This value was calculated to agree with other methods of the determination of light speed. This is how scientists came to believe that ordinary visible light is just another form of electromagnetic waves.

In matter and other medium of propagation, the permittivity and permeability of the electric and magnetic field is more complicated. This complication decreases the value for the speed of light. This effect slows the speed of light so much that even a charged particle can travel faster than the speed of light in the medium as seen in the experimentally verified phenomena of Cerenkov radiation. This is the optical equivalent of the sonic boom. this radiation was discovered in 1934 by the Russian physicist Pavel Cerenkov.

Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
The forces that are responsible for the long life of the porton are the strong and weak forces. The strong force holds it together, and it is made of the lightest particles affected by the strong force, up and down quarks. So the only force that could make it decay would be the weak force, but apparently the weak force doesn't have any very probable decay modes for the up and down quarks, so the proton just doesn't decay (in the short run).

You have said that "the weak force doesn't have any very probable decay modes for the up and down quarks, so the proton just doesn't decay"

Does that imply it does have probable decay modes for the other remaining quarks.

Do other mediators have different preference depending on the quarks involved.

Image if Newtons first law of motion did not apply to photon's of light in our 3-D universe - who turned out the lights......

I just watched Elegant Universe

and I must say that M-Theory seems to be a very nice theory.

I hope when CERN comes on-line we will see if we can see Gravitons leaving our Brane or Sparticles.

Gentlemen,

Now we all have to agree that the photons and protons live long and prosper. Together with the electrons, they are basically stable.

How do we use this fact of their stability to explain the age of the universe?

Will the universe exist forever? Is the "Heat Death" possible?

My idea that space itself is expanding, and the points of space are getting farther and farther apart is like starting out with a 19-inch TV screen and ending up with a 60-inch screen. The picture is the same on both screens, but everything is bigger on the 60-inch. If photons are sucked from point to point by the vacuum, this process involves the strong and weak force, so my ideas are still corresponding that what we know. And if photons always go from point to point in the same amount of time due to their mass, and the strength of the strong force which sucks them from point to point, then it would be impossible to tell the difference in size between the younger universe and the older universe. It' s like looking at a picture on a TV screen from 100 to 200 yards away. You can't tell what size the TV is.

After a certain amount of time two things happen. The points of space get so far apart that a moving point cannot be pulled by the strong force to the next point. Light will end up in suspended animation between two points, and stop. And all the points of that shell of space will run out of momentum and stop; then, since there is a distance between the points, those points that have stopped will fall back to the center of the universe between the expanding points, gathering up speed all the way to the center of the universe where they will bounce all the way back out again when they collide at the center creating new space. Space is continually exploding outward in shells. The lifespan of a shell could be 13,200 years of our time. The points of space in a new shell would be very close together and moving outward very fast. Since they are moving fast, then a billion years of their time will be like 100 years of our time. Time slows down within a system that is moving fast. Using my idea, it's easy to explain why. If a point/particle is drawn from one point to the next by the strong force, the the distance the target point moves after it leaves the initial point determines the real distance it travels from one point to the other. The longer the distance the longer the time it takes when the points are moving, but it's still the same amount of time within the system. So, the faster the system is moving, the longer it takes to be pulled from point to point when measured by an outside observer. This allows the extraordinary conclusion the shell of the universe we are living in really could be 13,000 years old, our time; when you figure as I do, that space itself is expanding against a combination of the strong and weak force, which selfAdjoint said are the two forces that power photons.

This allows for galaxies that appear to be moving away from us at close to the speed of light, which seems impossible, but which we observe. These galaxies would be young galaxies on the other side of the center of the universe, and would appear very far away.

Space is decellerating against the strong/weak force at a very fast rate. Galaxies, which are much denser than space, could since they are heavier, be slowing down at a slower rate, and appear to be accelerating.

So when our shell stops expanding in only a few more years, everything will disappear and our souls will be taken to the next shell beneath us, which we can easily see, and it looks just like this shell, but it is smaller, and has another several thousand years to live. Decay happens when the points within molecules are so far apart the electrons have trouble going from one point to the next. In time, the whole system collapses, but before that, our souls are transported to a younger shell. We travel through the "hyperspace" that exists between points, without going from point to point. Cool ending.

Last edited:
John,

Are you saying that the universe expands in order to make the strong force weak?

Ha, funny! That kind of thinking is what's got all of physics confused today: it is the idea that we can put thoughts together differently to find the answers. To find the answers, you have to start before logic started. Start with the concept of nothing. In other words, start with nothing. Nothing contains two ideas, no and thing. If we start with something, or just “thing” then we can’t go anywhere. There is. Period. End of story. Start with no thing, and we know there is the idea of thing if there can be no thing.

We can also have two. We have no and thing, which is two. Break up thing into two pieces. You have the first string. The string is two-dimensional, since it is made of two things. Oddly, math says strings have to be two-dimensional.

Now enter the world of fuzzy logic. The two things are separating into nothing, which does not contain the concept of space. Imagine building a house in neighborhood where all the lots have been taken. You can’t. Well actually you can, but you will be resisted. Two things can separate into nothing even though there is no space to separate them into. This is fuzzy logic. The result of encroaching on this logic is not that it is impossible, but there is a force that resists you. Now we have the first string, which is two things separating into nothing, and we have string tension; if we try to separate them further, we have the strong force. The strong force increases with distance.

Can a “thing” not have size? If the strong force increases with distance, then it decreases to 0 as distance deceases to 0. But you can’t get all the way to the center of two different things. They can only be so close together. So the string tension between two pieces of matter when they are touching each other is the weak force, which is a function of the strong force. The weak force is almost 0, but not quite because the two things can’t occupy the exact same space.

The product is the Higgs force which is zero.

The idea of the Higgs force is probably related to my idea. The Higgs field is like molasses that slows things down and gives them apparent mass. Not being presumptuous, that was a feature of my model that caused me a lot of consternation. I finally ended up with a mechanism that causes gravity to work and causes objects to appear to have mass.

I wish I could do computer animations to show what I am thinking.

Gentlemen,

If you recall, I have already said, the underlying beauty, is that - "The beauty is its simplicity. Even my children can now understand, it’s so simple and higgsless."

Are you intending to apply a higg's field solution?

Nice idea John, but your idea is very similar to the super-string theory, in my option your on the right track but heading in the wrong direction.

Instead of thinking of strings, think of the underlying theorems, which are themselves already used in QM and string-theory, and remember the simple, harmonic equations.

What happens when an electron reaches rest mass, can potentially happen.......an explosion traveling at the speed of light ...............a huge wave of light.........................photon's

what if?

what if, all space is fill to capacity with photon and what we see is mearly the result of some force at the other end? like water in a hose, if the hose is full of water, when you turn on the faucet it seems to emit water almost instantly. electrons? simply the result of forces on a photon as we measure it. Any givin force that is repeated will provide the same result. If we measure a photon wave at its peak, we see an electron, measure it at its middle we see light, and the unmeasurable portions might be dark energy.

i will be happy to explain in detail any portion of this thought, as it seems to cover a spectrum of accepted physics... so ask away 8)

Jessie... if all space was filled to capacity... not only would there not be any space any more... there would only be one thing.

E=mc2 its simplicity stunned its author(s), imagine after a lifetime of thought and endless calculations and re-calculations comming up with a solution as simple as this. You would feel good about the result, but would be put off a bit by the journey.
energy? mass? velocity? harmony?
motion is the key i think, or lack there of.
if a photon is "at rest" or "zero" then zero must also have energy of a sort, light perhaps. can something without mass have energy?

in both of the particle acceleration chambers in this country (at least at the time i did the essay) experiments were done to surmise the possability of reaching the speed of light. One of the test involved accelerating a particle to the speed of light, then directing the particle to a barrier where there were only 2 opening to pass through. once with both passages posativly charged, then negative, then one of each. the testors concluded that all three tests had failed due to equipment failure. but after looking at the results more closely they found that the equipment had functioned properly. the particle had passed through both openings at the same time in all three tests. at the speed of light "space" becomes irrelivent. a thing traveling at (c) can occupy more that one part of space at the same moment. with this in mind, anything at "zero" should be able to do the exact same thing.

a step farther .. if something can occupy more than one space at the same time, then why not all space at the same time? say something such as light which permeates all things at all times.

Antonio Lao said:
Gentlemen,

Now we all have to agree that the photons and protons live long and prosper. Together with the electrons, they are basically stable.

How do we use this fact of their stability to explain the age of the universe?

Will the universe exist forever? Is the "Heat Death" possible?
I think the answer to this question has to do with the question of "creation" and not the question of "stability."

Something that is created will eventually be destroyed... something that has always been, will always be.

Water in a hose, could partially be used to discribe gravity or gravity waves unfortunately it would mean having to give up c.

I think its to early to give up on c, I think we should wait and see....

Whether or not the universe will exist forever, considering the age of the human race I would not worry about this question too much.

However from a scientific point of view, now that we have established that the proton has a long and distant future. Provided the same can be said about spacetime, what more could we ask for.

The verdict is still out on the photon's life span, until the electron gives evidence.

photon's, electrons, six quarks, 3-D, time and Super Cloud, all we need is a spark or implosition and big bang.....

A picture paints a thousand words

http://www.nebulus.org/tutorials/2d/photoshop/color/ [Broken]

Considering all the comments above I would appreciate everyones option on the possibilities the above mentioned site has on the bearing of our conversation?

A picture paints a thousand words

Last edited by a moderator:
Does anti_crank agree with my other theories?

Terry Giblin said:
If we can learn to accept that Quarks and Leptons are the remnants of the six missing dimensions as described in the M-Theory, our understanding and knowledge of the GUT would increase exponentially.

Accepting the concept that Quarks are the missing six dimensions automatically solves several major questions.

Where are the six missing dimensions described in the M-Theory?

How matter (Quarks) was formed during the Big Bang as a by product, when the other six dimensions collapsed?

Why the half-life of Proton, is what it is.

The Duality of an electron and photon.

Why Quasars (Super Massive Black Holes) formed before Galaxies appeared!

The beauty of this theory, accepting all the evidence which indicates Quarks are the missing six dimensions is that it does not change any currently accepted theorem's it simply explains them in more detail and with clear understanding.

Regards

Terry Giblin
If you including the 10/11 D Super cloud in the calculations, remember to include the 5 D used to form the cloud.

11D Super Cloud Equ.

B(t) = - (t^3)/16(Pi)^2 * ((11/3)*N(c) - ((4+1)/3) * N(f)/2)

10D equ. within Super Cloud

B(t) = - (t^3)/16(Pi)^2 * (((11-1)/3)*N(c) - (4/3) * N(f)/2)

I don't know where this equation originated from or what it represents but it seemed to fit what I was looking for.

If quantum electrons can be used to help solve the DSE, what implications does it have on our understand of quarks.

I would appreciate anti_cranks option?

Regards

Terry Giblin