An Idea

[Profpat]

Hi Austin;

Regarding your 1st impossibility: God or randomness could have made the choice among the many.

Regarding your 2nd impossibility: I would add the universe is impossible, yet here it is.

Best,

Pat

[dipayankar]

If neutrinos are particles, (not energy particles), then they should have mass. Absolutely zero mass is not permissible for bosons.

Hi Dipayankar;

No I don't think they would. Quarks have mass, and therefore would cause gravity but neutrinos have no mass and so would not interact with quarks, or effect gravity.

Best,

Pat

[Profpat]

If neutrinos are particles, (not energy particles), then they should have mass. Absolutely zero mass is not permissible for bosons.

If they have mass then they would interact with quarks. I think the jury is still trying to decide if they have mass or not.

Best to you Dipayankar,

Pat

[dipayankar]

So as of now it is not conclusive. What characteristics would make people think that they have mass??

If they have mass then they would interact with quarks. I think the jury is still trying to decide if they have mass or not.

Best to you Dipayankar,

Pat

[Felix Schrodinger]

Hi Prof

I've recently joined and have only just read your idea(s). A lot of interesting stuff in there but I want to comment specifically on your pipe cleaner model - presumably you're one of the old school who expected all research physicists to smoke a pipe whilst explaining relativity?

Whilst your interwoven strings (the pipe cleaners) would explain the charges on the proton and neutron they would not explain the strong force. If we combine your concept with something resembling a Higgs Boson then a better possibility emerges.

Lets say the HB is (for this illustration) in the form of a ring which holds three strings pushed through it. One end of each string is positive and the other is negatively charged. The proton consists of the three strings pulled partially out to expose themselves as: +2/3 +2/3 -1/3 = 1 and the neutron consists of the other ends of the same strings: +1/3 +1/3 -2/3 = 0. The strong force is just the strength of the strings themselves as they would have to be broken in order to split the proton from the neutron.

It's taken me some time to respond as I wanted to use a diagram showing this but it's in M/S Office and I can't see how to cut and paste from Word.

[dipayankar]

Its pretty simple. Just copy from word and paste it here. This forum works on the Microsoft model of copy and paste. Try it should not be difficult

Hi Prof

I've recently joined and have only just read your idea(s). A lot of interesting stuff in there but I want to comment specifically on your pipe cleaner model - presumably you're one of the old school who expected all research physicists to smoke a pipe whilst explaining relativity?

Whilst your interwoven strings (the pipe cleaners) would explain the charges on the proton and neutron they would not explain the strong force. If we combine your concept with something resembling a Higgs Boson then a better possibility emerges.

Lets say the HB is (for this illustration) in the form of a ring which holds three strings pushed through it. One end of each string is positive and the other is negatively charged. The proton consists of the three strings pulled partially out to expose themselves as: +2/3 +2/3 -1/3 = 1 and the neutron consists of the other ends of the same strings: +1/3 +1/3 -2/3 = 0. The strong force is just the strength of the strings themselves as they would have to be broken in order to split the proton from the neutron.

It's taken me some time to respond as I wanted to use a diagram showing this but it's in M/S Office and I can't see how to cut and paste from Word.

[Profpat]

Hi Felix;

Welcome to the forum and thanks for your interest in my Idea.

Part of my Idea is that the strong nuclear and weak nuclear are part of the electro magnetic force. The binding action is the positive and negative domains in the 7 domained area of the proton or 8 domained area of the neutron. This binding or stacking has a limit and when reached would break down emitting alpha particles.

I would like to see your description it sounds interesting.

Best to you,

Pat

[Profpat]

So as of now it is not conclusive. What characteristics would make people think that they have mass??

Hi Dipayankar;

This might help answer your question.

Historic Dispute : Do neutrinos have mass?



Viewpoint: Yes, the Japanese-U.S. research team called the Super-Kamiokande Collaboration announced experiment results in 1998 that proved that neutrinos do indeed have mass.
Viewpoint: No, the experiments of earlier twentieth-century scientists repeatedly indicated that neutrinos did not have mass.
In 1931 Wolfgang Pauli first predicted the existence of a subatomic particle that Enrico Fermi would later name the neutrino. The neutrino must exist, Pauli reasoned, because otherwise the atomic process known as beta decay would violate the physical laws of conservation of energy and conservation of angular momentum. Neutrinos had never been detected, so Pauli concluded that they didn't interact with most other particles or forces. This implied they were extremely small particles with no charge or mass.
The only force that noticeably affects neutrinos is the "weak" force, a subatomic force that is not as strong as the force that holds the atomic nucleus together, but that likewise operates only at very short range. Because of their extremely limited interactions with other particles and forces, neutrinos can travel huge distances unimpeded by anything in their path. Neutrinos arising from the nuclear reactions in the Sun stream through Earth and all its inhabitants without having any effect whatsoever. For this reason they are extremely difficult to detect, and their existence was not confirmed until a quarter century after Pauli's prediction.
Today's neutrino detectors, kept deep underground to avoid stray particles on Earth's surface, may contain thousands of tons of fluid. While trillions of neutrinos pass through the fluid every day, only a few dozen are likely to be detected.
Scientists have discovered that there are three types of neutrinos, each associated with a different charged particle for which it is named. Thus they are called the electron neutrino, muon neutrino, and tau neutrino. The first type of neutrino to be discovered was the electron neutrino, in 1959. The muon neutrino was discovered in 1962. The tau neutrino has yet to be directly observed. It was inferred from the existence of the tau particle itself, which was discovered in 1978. The tau particle is involved in decay reactions with the same imbalance that Pauli solved for beta decay by postulating the electron neutrino.
One ongoing issue in neutrino research is called the "solar neutrino problem." This refers to the detection of fewer electron neutrinos than expected, given the known energy output of the Sun. One possible explanation for this phenomenon could be "oscillation" between the different neutrino types. That is, electron neutrinos could change into muon or tau neutrinos, which are even more difficult to detect. Similarly, scientists have observed a deficit in the number of muon neutrinos they would expect to see coming from cosmic rays.
Neutrino oscillations, if they exist, are a quantum mechanical phenomenon dependent on the difference in the masses of the two types of particles. That means that if researchers could prove that neutrino oscillation occurs, at least one of the neutrino types involved must have a non-zero mass. In 1998 a Japanese-U.S. research team called the Super-Kamiokande Collaboration announced that they had discovered evidence of oscillation between muon neutrinos and either the tau neutrino or a new, unknown type.

Best to you,

Pat

[neutralino]

I don't know whether you've seen this or not, Pat, but I wrote a little about future experiments for detecting neutrinos which may be of interest in relation to your last post.

[Profpat]

Thanks for the link Neutralino;

To answer Dipayankars original question it doesn't appear they would interact with quarks.

Best to all,

Pat