mad photons before nsyn

[AntonioLao]

The era of the angry mad photons is limited to within the first 3 minutes of the big bang. This period is also responsible for the first of two types of nucleosynthesis (nsyn): first is primordial and second is stellar. Although stellar nsyn is still taking place as we speak in the interior of stars, primordial nsyn happened only once. The fusion products are the observed cosmic abundances of simple nuclei no heavier than the first 4 elements of the periodic table: hydrogen, helium, lithium, and beryllium with respective atomic number of 1, 2, 3, and 4. Primordial nsyn rejected all fusion products with atomic numbers of 5 and above. Subsequently these are synthesized by stellar nsyn when stars were born.

Before the nsyn era the temperature is above 1 billion Kelvins and the age of the universe is less than 3 minutes. This is the era of mad photons each with an average kinetic energy of 1 ten billionth of a joule. By a cosmic coincidence this is also the relativistic energy needed for the creation of a proton. Therefore, two mad photons each with higher energy going at each other’s throat will annihilate and produce a proton-antiproton pair. But the proton are favored to survive thus the universe becomes dominated by matter not antimatter.

This process is based on the validity of QED’s pair production and annihilation. On the other hand, by QCD, proton is made of 2 up quarks and 1 down quark. Therefore, there must a fundamental connection between photon and quark which is really a boson-fermion connection rather than boson-boson or fermion-fermion. The lingering question is where are the mad angry quarks before nsyn?

[mkirkpatrick]

Whats three mınutes between frıends Antoniö?



regards michael.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

The era of the angry mad photons is limited to within the first 3 minutes of the big bang. This period is also responsible for the first of two types of nucleosynthesis (nsyn): first is primordial and second is stellar. Although stellar nsyn is still taking place as we speak in the interior of stars, primordial nsyn happened only once. The fusion products are the observed cosmic abundances of simple nuclei no heavier than the first 4 elements of the periodic table: hydrogen, helium, lithium, and beryllium with respective atomic number of 1, 2, 3, and 4. Primordial nsyn rejected all fusion products with atomic numbers of 5 and above. Subsequently these are synthesized by stellar nsyn when stars were born.

Before the nsyn era the temperature is above 1 billion Kelvins and the age of the universe is less than 3 minutes. This is the era of mad photons each with an average kinetic energy of 1 ten billionth of a joule. By a cosmic coincidence this is also the relativistic energy needed for the creation of a proton. Therefore, two mad photons each with higher energy going at each other’s throat will annihilate and produce a proton-antiproton pair. But the proton are favored to survive thus the universe becomes dominated by matter not antimatter.

This process is based on the validity of QED’s pair production and annihilation. On the other hand, by QCD, proton is made of 2 up quarks and 1 down quark. Therefore, there must a fundamental connection between photon and quark which is really a boson-fermion connection rather than boson-boson or fermion-fermion. The lingering question is where are the mad angry quarks before nsyn?

Where they always were Antonio, eternally existing. But, I think you should consider the possibility of absolutely scalable dark photons, before nsyn even started to form the mad angry quarks___The dark particle energy of infinity...? There's no science that eliminates such a possibility. It's just that it's a theoretical possibility, only...

Lloyd

[AntonioLao]

I think you should consider the possibility of absolutely scalable dark photons, before nsyn even started to form the mad angry quarks___The dark particle energy of infinity...? There's no science that eliminates such a possibility. It's just that it's a theoretical possibility, only...

I still cannot understand which come first the chicken or the egg? Relevant question is which come first the quarks or the photons assuming they are both dark?

[AntonioLao]

Whats three mınutes between frıends

If you are having fun then it is less than nothing but if you feel out of place then it is longer than an eternity. Relevantly, the photons are ageless but refuse to congregate. On the other hand the quarks are not ageless and want to congregate but cannot.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

I still cannot understand which come first the chicken or the egg? Relevant question is which come first the quarks or the photons assuming they are both dark?

You know Antonio, I resolved that question years ago, then forgot it, and finally recovered the information after joining this site and the "Space and Motion" site. The trouble with the space and motion site was Geoff's insistence on not allowing any standard model physics, and I saw the answer as both particle and waves. By resolving, I mean that a fundamental substance has to exist first, for the laws of conservation to be practical, and all the sensible laws of physics must fit any final picture. If it's a conservation of matter and energy universe, then a fundamental substance is required to exist, as energy from no source is impossible___That's just far too metaphysical, for my science thinking. Yes, through the years, I drifted from one prospect to the other, but in the end, physical substance won out. Therefore, the only way to figure out the chicken and the egg, is to know energy must come from a "first matter in motion substance..." I see no other way... As to quarks or photons, my gut tells me the photons, being absolutely scalable, by necessity of one fundamental substance being scalable, would have to exist first, and also as quarks seem to be more complex, thus needing to be made of a more fundamental substance. It's just to counter-intuitive for most to see the particle energy, as a dual function particle energy, existing on both sides of the main universal event... I have no problem theoretically visualizing such a model... Of course, there's also the Higgs Boson, that the Hadron will be looking for, but IMO, the dark photon will still be the fundamental substance of any such boson... I may be wrong, but an absolutely scalable photon works awfully well to fill all the models' bills...

Lloyd

[AntonioLao]

but an absolutely scalable photon works awfully well

Just wondering if these scalable dark photons could be described by the squares of energy?

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Just wondering if these scalable dark photons could be described by the squares of energy?

Certainly can Antonio, as long as one realizes, energy does not exist as a separate entity from the matter/particle/wave aspects of the dark photon. Of course, many use energy, without truly defining it. Einstein's formula is fine if one realizes the E, in E=MC^2, means GMEV, i.e., Group Matter Energy Velocities. It's easiest to see through the realities of an H-Bomb explosion. The bomb's matter and waves explode into a much thinner density of matter waves, as they all approach the speed of light interactions, and disperse extremely violently. All the same amout of matter/energy is conserved___Completely... It just seems few scientists have realized, the Group Matter Energy Velocities, are completely conserved___They're all still there, just rather violently dispersed. I see no difference at the cosmological or quantum levels, when all motions are thoroughly considered... Feyneman, in his QED lectures, clearly pointed out the dual aspects of the photon's particle and wave mechanics. He further extended the theory to QCD, and the newest version of his QED book, has further note updates to his original work, by other leading physicists...

Energy is always "Matter In Motion." Though the densities may be near infinitesimally thinner, the dual aspects of particle and wave, must always be present, at the photonic level...

Lloyd

[AntonioLao]

and the newest version of his QED book, has further note updates to his original work, by other leading physicists...

I got to look this up, thanks. Would this be the lost sea scrolls of Feynman's lectures?

[Lloyd Gillespie]

I got to look this up, thanks. Would this be the lost sea scrolls of Feynman's lectures?

Yes, and I think the full title of the new book is; "QED, The Strageness of Light and Matter."

Lloyd