[baudrunner]

I pulled this response to another thread from another forum because I think it merits its own thread.

The way I see it, in quantum mechanics a•b does not always equal b•a and I figure that the reason that this is so is because while the proton is positively charged, the neutron must still have a net negative charge with respect to the proton, that is elementary electronic theory. Now, I think that we should perhaps shift the existing popular paradigm wherein electrons are negative, protons are positive, and neutrons are neutral, to a new one wherein electrons are neutral, protons are positive and neutrons are negative. Electrons can still have magnetic moment in the new paradigm because that is only a function of their spin. What is happening in the new paradigm then is that the negative charge of the neutron is balanced by the presence of a dark matter anti-particle giving us the illusion that it has a neutral charge because we don't look for the anti-matter particle since it has no presence in our existing popular atomic model paradigm but still has a charge relationship with the neutron in our new one. What strikes me is that we could easily have been fooled by the results of high energy particle collision experiments all along because there is nothing that has happened in our existing paradigm that necessarily disproves the new one. If the anti-matter particle in question is an anti-proton with anti-uud quark composition it will cancel the negative charge of the udd quarks of the neutron and become undetectable in the current paradigm. Then the uud quarks confer upon the ordinary proton the property of a positively charged particle giving the nucleus a net positive charge and the electron therefore carries a net negative charge, even though it is technically neutral. The reason that the anti-particle does not get annihilated is that it has a permanent place in the Chinese puzzle that is the nucleus so that it is trapped with the integral properties of a functional sub-atomic particle and never actually makes contact with its counterpart but is still able to cancel the negative charge of the neutron. So the neutron exists as an ordinary matter particle with what we have been assuming is no charge.

Furthermore, this new way of thinking explains the existence of dark matter all around us because anti-matter particles still have the same mass as their corresponding ordinary matter particles.

Also, electrons can bunch up, which is a normal behaviour for neutral particles.

note: anti-matter equivalent of quark arrangement of uud does not equate with udd.

[HIGGSBOSONS]

Can You Explain Charge Quantisation In Quarks Because Their Charges Are In Fraction

[KAC]

Keeping in mind that Classical Electric Charge is not Quantizated.

The model you purpose is something like one I have been developing.

The Anti-particle that your looking for would be the Anti-Neutrino. Which Classically has 0 Electric charge, I believe that it in fact has +1 Magnetic Charge. Infact, under my paradigm no neutral particle can exist besides the Photon and it has a limit to how small and how big it can be.

I predict that the Neutron infact holds a small Positive charge, that in near to zero electric, but not exactly. I further predict that the Proton does not then actually have +1 charge but near +1.

I like what you got, but I don't see the reason for switching around charge signs.

[michellemfry]

These neutrinos and anti-neutrinos can traverse vast amounts of matter uninhibited by the huge entities that exist, passing right through. As if there were an invisible network of wormholes that they use like a fabric of space that is sentient and directional, spatial and temporal, and it is the closest thing to a time machine, only it is huge and universal and called spacetime.
Or maybe I need therapy.

[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by michellemfry These neutrinos and anti-neutrinos can traverse vast amounts of matter uninhibited by the huge entities that exist, passing right through. As if there were an invisible network of wormholes that they use like a fabric of space that is sentient and directional, spatial and temporal, and it is the closest thing to a time machine, only it is huge and universal and called spacetime. Or maybe I need therapy.

Michelle,where have you been girl?Glad to see you in attendance at last.


regards michael.