|
Page 6
• What is more, this accounts for Olber's paradox which questioned why, in a universe full of stars, the sky at night is dark and not a blaze of light. Then the light from the distant stars at so great a distance from us will decrease by the square of that distance travelled and this seems to be the obvious answer to the paradox.
The aspect of the Neutron being a mono-pole accounts for the following:-
1. Planets and stars are round.
2. There is such a thing as the centre of gravity. If a ruler is balanced at the mid point it is because there are the same number of Neutrons on either side of the balancing point, making the ruler level with the level ground beneath it. If extra Neutrons are added to one side, as in placing a match there, then rulers will become unbalanced as there are more Neutrons on the match side as against the other.
3. Planets and other celestial bodies will have a specific orbit around
a larger or more dense body at a specific speed and distance from it. If the speed is increased, then the lesser body will gradually move out of the orbit and fly off into space. On the other hand, if the speed decreases, the orbit will reduce and the lesser body will be drawn into the arms of the larger or more dense body. Thus force(energy), velocity (speed) and distance in relation to the rest mass of the two bodies are the only anti-gravity factors in the universe as every atom has mass and a gravity pull to some degree.
• The Positron and the Neutron are together called a Proton which is only the Positron wrapped around a Neutron and together form the nucleus of the atom. This accounts for three failings of normal science.
1. The Proton is 1836 times larger than the Electron but only gives out the equivalent power. This is because it is only the Positron that gives out the force field which is equivalent to that of the Electron. Hence the Proton which has the Positron as the supplier of the positive force which offsets the Electron negative force also gives out the same energy level at the Electron. The Neutron only gives out gravity.
2. The Proton is claimed to be slightly less in rest mass than the Neutron. As already note, the Neutron wrapped around by the Positron will be slightly further away from two Neutrons together and, judging from Newton's Law of Radiation (included in his Theory of Gravity), it will have less gravitational effect, thereby perceived as having less rest mass.
3. SI units for the Electron are 0.0009109 x 10-27 kg.
Proton is 1.67252 x 10-27 kg.-27 kg
The trouble is that the Neutron is 1.674282 x 10-27 kg.
Normal science claims that the Electron plus the Proton make the Neutron but they do not add up as neither does the Neutron giving up an Electron to become a Proton make any sense. No where in normal science is it shown that the universe has lighter than normal Neutrons (if E+P=N) nor are there heavier than normal Protons (if N-E=P).
• To overcome the problem, rather than redo the whole normal science theory, Wolfgang Pauli, in 1930, in what he called his 'desperate way out', suggested that a low mass, uncharged and unseen particle must be emitted at the same time as the Electron.
• By the way, this does not account for the reverse unless the unseen particle also joins with the Electron when E + P = N. In 1934, Enrico Fermi continued with Pauli's proposal and proposed the 'desperate way out' particle be called the neutrino which is Italian for 'little one'. From then on, because of the standing of Pauli and Fermi at the time in the scientific establishment, the neutrino was born. Surprise, surprise in 1956 Frederick Reines and Clyde Cowan saw a flash of light in a 10 ton water tank. They claimed that this must be the illusive neutrino from the nearby atomic nuclear facility .
• You should note that the neutrino, for all intents and purposes, is invisible and although all the practical attempts to relate the solar neutrinos with the theoretical numbers are in vain, from then on the 'desperate way out' became concrete normal science and Reines got his Nobel Prize for Physics in 1995; Cowan having died by this time.
• The Quantum Energy Theory does not need to make up 'desperate way outs' as the Electron, the Positron and the Neutron, as explained above, cover all areas under consideration.
• The Electron and the Positron and the Neutron join to form the basis of every atom, each bringing a specific attribute that enables the atom to function as it does.
1. The number of Electrons, with their respective force fields of electricity, defines the size of the atom and enables the atom to join with another, creating the molecules that form the basis of the universe.
2. The Positron defines the element type of atom it is.
3. The Neutron gives to the atom its rest mass.
The standard Model, as quoted in the book 'A Journey through Space and the Atom' in the 8 chapters entitled "Elementary Atomic Physics and Applications of Atomic Energy" by S.T.Butler and H Messel,published by Pergamon Press, page 305, which says " We have previously stated that all matter is made up of three fundamental building blocks - neutrons, protons and electrons. This is certainly true, although we should mention at this stage that neutrons have a very remarkable property. This is that any neutron by itself will not last for ever. It has a certain "lifetime'. Any neutron left by itself will eventually turn into a proton and send off an electron. The average lifetime of such a free neutron is 12.8 minutes. This process is called the decay of the neutron. Initially, the neutron has zero electric charge, and so also the total charge of its decay products is zero."
So where is the Positron in all this and if the Neutron has zero electrical charge, where does the Electron come from unless the Neutron, now a Proton, has an offsetting positive charge, the source of which is what, seeing that "and so the total charge of its decay product (the Proton of course) is also said to be zero"?
The Quantum Energy Theory holds that the Neutron joins with a Positron which it finds in the Photon of energy (a photon of energy being the joining of a positron and an electron, remember) to become the Proton and this releases the spare Electron.
Surely a more plausible explanation, don't you think?
•
continued
|