An Idea

[dipayankar]

If gravity is the interaction of matter with gravitron, then probably then probably by studing whether neutrinos interact with gravity, we can find out more about gravitron..

I located this which may be of interest to you Dipayankar;

The neutrino and its friends
Neutrinos are one of the fundamental particles which make up the universe. They are also one of the least understood.
Neutrinos are similar to the more familiar electron, with one crucial difference: neutrinos do not carry electric charge. Because neutrinos are electrically neutral, they are not affected by the electromagnetic forces which act on electrons. Neutrinos are affected only by a "weak" sub-atomic force of much shorter range than electromagnetism, and are therefore able to pass through great distances in matter without being affected by it. If neutrinos have mass, they also interact gravitationally with other massive particles, but gravity is by far the weakest of the four known forces.

Best,

Pat

[Profpat]

The problem with the graviton, is that like the Higgs Boson, it's hypothetical and we don't know if it truly exist. The neutrino existence however, I believe has been confirmed.

GravitonComposition:Elementary particleInteraction:GravityStatus:HypotheticalMass:0Mean lifetime:StableElectric charge:0Spin:2

Best,

Pat

[neutralino]

I stumbled upon a nice article about the Higgs particle recently. Apparently, in 1993, the UK science minister issued a challenge to physicists to describe the Higgs boson and why we want to find it on one piece of paper. Here is a list of the winners: I especially liked this article, written by Tom Kibble, which seems to explain the problem, and what the Higgs is, in a rather simple way!

[Profpat]

Thanks neutralino for the link. In my theory I deal only with the proton, electron , neutron and photon. The other particles, except for the quark and strings, I eliminated as not being necessary.

This was my attempt to keep my Idea as simple and as understandable as possible.

Prior to my discovery of Gell-Mann’s theory of the quark I was stuck with Fritjof Capra’s THE TAO OF PHYSICS, which seemed to give up on any meaningful physical discovery of a true GUT.
We seemed stuck with a particle zoo, where only philosophy and metaphysics could help us understand our reality.
The Tao and the I Ching were his main principles.

With the quark, to me everything seemed to make sense.
Suddenly I could see the strong force as a form of the electro/magnetic force of positive and negative binding and even the weak nuclear force as a limitation to this binding. ( I wish I was computer literate enough to try a computer simulation on this theory to see if it works )

I too incorporate in my Idea of the Tao and I Ching, but have a real physical reality underlying it.

Now it’s back to the particle zoo again with real, hypothetical and virtual particles plaguing me and my Idea.

I appreciate that I cannot wish them away, but the remaining particles do seem esoteric and not crucial at least to my theory.

And so like Einstein with the original ether, if it’s not necessary just eliminate it. Of course Einstein had to revisit the issue and accept the ether as being real.

As it stands now I eliminate all hypothetical and virtual particles. The neutrino does present me with problems however, in that they are apparently real.

Best to you and all,

Pat

[dipayankar]

Hi Prof... is this book ' The Tao of Physics' any good scientifically? I was about to buy it. But decided against it.. I am awaiting your suggestion.

Thanks neutralino for the link. In my theory I deal only with the proton, electron , neutron and photon. The other particles, except for the quark and strings, I eliminated as not being necessary.

This was my attempt to keep my Idea as simple and as understandable as possible.

Prior to my discovery of Gell-Mann’s theory of the quark I was stuck with Fritjof Capra’s THE TAO OF PHYSICS, which seemed to give up on any meaningful physical discovery of a true GUT.
We seemed stuck with a particle zoo, where only philosophy and metaphysics could help us understand our reality.
The Tao and the I Ching were his main principles.

With the quark, to me everything seemed to make sense.
Suddenly I could see the strong force as a form of the electro/magnetic force of positive and negative binding and even the weak nuclear force as a limitation to this binding. ( I wish I was computer literate enough to try a computer simulation on this theory to see if it works )

I too incorporate in my Idea of the Tao and I Ching, but have a real physical reality underlying it.

Now it’s back to the particle zoo again with real, hypothetical and virtual particles plaguing me and my Idea.

I appreciate that I cannot wish them away, but the remaining particles do seem esoteric and not crucial at least to my theory.

And so like Einstein with the original ether, if it’s not necessary just eliminate it. Of course Einstein had to revisit the issue and accept the ether as being real.

As it stands now I eliminate all hypothetical and virtual particles. The neutrino does present me with problems however, in that they are apparently real.

Best to you and all,

Pat

[Profpat]

Hi Prof... is this book ' The Tao of Physics' any good scientifically? I was about to buy it. But decided against it.. I am awaiting your suggestion.

I would highly recommend it Dipayankar. It's a real classic.

Best,

Pat

[Profpat]

Here is just a taste of it Dipayankar:


In the Eastern view, then, the division of nature into separate objects is not fundamental and any such objects have a fluid and ever-changing character. The Eastern world view is therefore intrinsically dynamic and contains time and change as essential features. The cosmos is seen as one inseparable reality-for ever in motion, alive, organic; spiritual and material at the same time.
Since motion and change are essential properties of things, the forces causing the motion are not outside the objects, as in the classical Greek view, but are an intrinsic property of matter. Correspondingly, the Eastern image of the Divine is not that of a ruler who directs the world from above, but of a principle that controls everything from within:

He who, dwelling in all things,
Yet is other than all things,
Whom all things do not know,
Whose body all things are,
Who controls all things from within-
He is your Soul, the Inner Controller,
The Immortal.

Best,

Pat

[b1rdman]

Hi Prof,
I can agree with you on the "zoo of particles" being troublesome.
But I don't think that they are necessary to explain our world. A hockey player doesn't need to understand anatomy and physiology to know how to skate. It helps, but it's not necessary.
The same applies for atomic particles and subatomic particles. You don't need to know what makes up the parts of atoms to understand the principles of atomic particles.
It's a different area of study. I don't see neutrinos as being so much a problem as a different school of study than what you are explaining.
Muon Neutrinos are real. They have been detected, but lab created muons can only be detected for nanoseconds (or some such small timeframe) before they dissolve. I briefly address this in my ToE. I believe that because they are the building blocks the smaller level of creation, they are too small to have the cohension necessary to exist in our level of creation. The forces which we take for granted are too powerful for such small particles.

I haven't had much time to look over you paper, but what I've seen looks interesting. I hope to delve deeper into it when I have the time.

Eric

[dipayankar]

Okay thanks Prof.. probably I will go and buy myself a copy.

I would highly recommend it Dipayankar. It's a real classic.

Best,

Pat

[Profpat]

Hi Eric:

Thanks for your input and interest. I agree the neutrino has no electric charge and very likely no mass, and therefor would not interact with the E/M force or with gravity. It appears only when a neutron breaks down to a proton and electron, and its my understanding that a neutrino is necessary to balance that interaction.

Since it goes through everything with little to no interaction I have ignored it in my Idea.

Best to you sir,

Pat