FANDOM



This paper was announced to many universities around the world (December 2013)

By prof. LEFTERIS KALIAMBOS (Λευτέρης Καλιαμπός) T. E. Institute of Larissa Greece

Lk2



THE CHARGES OF QUARKS DISCOVERED  BY GELL-MANN  LEAD NOT TO COLOR FORCES OR TO HIS ENERGY OF FALSE MASSLESS  GLUONS  BUT TO THE FUNDAMENTAL CHARGE –CHARGE INTERACTIONS.   EXPERIMENTS OF THE MAGNETIC MOMENTS OF NUCLEONS  REJECT THE uud and dud  SCHEMES WITH MASSLESS GLUONS BECAUSE ENERGY CANNOT TURN INTO MASS  

By 1960, the study of elementary particles, which was expected to clarify the nature of the so-called strong interaction, had instead spawned a bewildering array of particles whose production and decay modes defied understanding within the framework of existing models. In the late 1950s and early 1960s various schemes were proposed and then discarded with disconcerting regularity. The grouping of these particles suggested some fundamental pattern, but it took a few false starts to hit upon what now appears to be the correct model. The quark model was proposed independently by Gell-Mann and Zweig in 1964 who suggested that the proton and neutron  consist of the schemes (uud) and (dud) respectively where the u (up quark) has a charge +2e/3, while the d (down quark) has a charge –e/3.

 However despite the enormous success of the Bohr model and the Schrodinger equation in three dimensions  based on the well-established laws of nature Gell-Mann influenced by Einstein’s invalid relativity abandoned the natural laws in favor of wrong hypotheses of color forces between fallacious massless gluons leading to complications. Note that according to my discovery of the Photon-Matter Transformation  the energy cannot turn into mass. Moreover the photon of Lewis (1926) absorbed by an electron contributes not only to the increase of the electron energy ΔΕ  but also to the increase of the electron mass ΔΜ in accoerdance with the two conservation laws of energy and mass and the experiment of Kaufmann performed in 1902. Whereas Einstein's massless quanta of fields led to his invalid relativity which violates the two vonservation laws of energy and mass. (See my PHOTON-MATTER INTERACTION and OUR EARLY UNIVERSE ).  Unfortunately today scientists influenced by various theories underestimate the three dimensions  of the Schrodinger equation in favor of multiple dimensions. ( See my BOHR AND SCHRODINGER REJECT EINSTEIN ).

Also Gell-Mann’s simple quark model cannot be compared with the mass of nucleons because the hypothetical energy of massless gluons cannot turn into the mass of nucleons. On the other hand such a simple model  could not be  compared with the deep inelastic scattering  and the experiments of the magnetic moments μ for proton and neutron. According to the deep inelastic scattering experiments the simple scheme (uud) for proton should  give a negative charge –e/3 at the center surrounded by the  positive charge of  +4e/3 , while  Sanders in 1957 for the proton of mass M  and spin S found that μ/S = 2.793(e/M).  Our detailed analysis of this formula based on laws showed that in proton among 288 quarks there exist 9 extra charged quarks giving charges of  -5e//3 at the center and +8e/3 along the periphery.

In the same way though Dirac in his wrong theory of relativistic quantum mechanics (1928) proposed that the g-factor of neutron is zero,  N. R. Corngold and N. F. Ramsey in 1956 found that in neutron  the g-factor is  g = -1.913 which means that in neutron among 288 quarks there exist 12 extra charged quarks  giving a great charge distribution of  +8e/3 at the center and -8e/3 along the periphery. 

 Moreover applications of the well-established electromagnetic laws  on such charge distributions in nucleons lead exactly to the nuclear binding and structure, which invalidates not only Einstein’s the so-called  mass-energy conservation but also Gell-Mann’s simple quark model with hypothetical color forces between fallacious  massless gluons, which lead to the so-called false STRONG INTERACTION .

Olympia

Olympia 1993 Einstein's quanta led to wrong relativity


Note that in 1993  I presented in Olympia  my paper ‘Impact of Maxwell’s equation of  displacement current on electromagnetic laws and comparison of the Maxwellian waves with our model of dipolic particles”  according to which the well-established laws of electromagnetism and the experiments invalidate both Maxwell’s fields and Einstein’s relativity. (See my LAWS AND EXPERIMENTS INVALIDATE FIELDS AND RELATIVITY ).  

Also at the same time in Larissa I used  the same laws of electromagnetism to compare the g- factor g = 2.793 of Sanders with the hypothetical proton charge distribution of –e/3 and +4e/3 given by Gell-Mann. Surprisingly I found that the scheme (uud) gives a factor g<<2.793 even in case in which the charge q = -e/3 is at the center and the charge Q = +4e/3 is distributed along the periphery of the proton. In fact, our detailed analysis gives  g = 2.793 when q = -5e/3 and Q = +8e/3 which means that in proton among a large number of neutral quark triads (dud) there exist  5 down extra charged quarks   making a point charge at the center of the proton, in accordance with the experiments of the deep inelastic scattering, while the charge of +8e/3 distributed along the periphery gives the experimental factor g = 2.793 discovered by Sanders.

In our detailed analysis the proton of radius R as a  particle spinning with an angular velocity ω  behaves like an oblate spheroid  with a spin  S = tMωR2, where 0.4 <  t  < 0.5 which characterizes the shape of proton between a sphere and a disk.  Note that for a spinning sphere S = 0.4MωR2 while for a spinning disk S = 0.5MωR2 .

On the other hand the contribution of the peripheral charge  Q = +8e/3 to μ  as a real  circular current I is given by

 I = Qν = Q(ω/2π). Thus  μ = ΙπR2 = QνπR2 = Q(ω/2π)πR2 = Q(ω/2) R2 =(8e/3)(ω/2) R2

Then comparing it with the S = tMωR2 one arrives at  μ/S = 2.793(e/M) when  t = 0.47742 .

Similarly to describe the structure of neutron I took into account the experimental symmetry properties of nucleons that the current distributions within the neutron and the proton are quite similar. So a charge distribution analogous to proton was obtained since experiments showed that a negative charge Q =  -8e/3  is along the periphery while the opposite charge Q = + 8e/3 is limited at the center. But for g  = -1.913  such a distribution gives t = 0.69693. That is  1 > t > 0.5 characterizing a shape between a ring and a disk.

Lk3

structure of magic nulei


This value is not surprising for an oblate spheroid of neutron, since the mass of the negative charge along the periphery corresponding to the 8 down quarks is greater than the mass of the positive  4 up quarks at the center. Moreover these charge distributions of proton and neutron satisfy the conservation of charge in the  decay of neutron, while the simple quark model of Gell-Mann leads to complications and suffers from deficiencies. On the other hand the charge distributions of the simple quark model cannot lead to the nuclear structure and binding while applications of the well-established laws of electromagnetism lead exactly to the structure of all magic nuclei (See my STRUCTURE OF MAGIC NUCLEI ).

 

THE ANTINEUTRINO ABSORPTION BY PROTONS LED TO MY DISCOVERY OF 288 QUARKS IN NUCLEONS WHICH REJECT THE SO-CALLED WEAK INTERACTION

Under the wrong hypothesis of massless gluons also  the nuclear experiments reject the simple schemes of (uud) in proton and (dud) in neutron in favor of 9 extra charged quarks in proton and 12 ones in neutron. According to nuclear  experiments such extra quarks cover a very small part of 93 neutral quark triads in proton and 92 neutral quark triads in neutron which explain the instability of neutron. (See my NEW STRUCTURE OF PROTONS AND NEUTRONS ).

 For example the antineutrino ( ν )  absorption by proton (p) is given by

 ν +  p = n + e+  or in MeV 1.8 +  938.2723 = 939.5656 + 0.511

Thus  p – n = 939.5656 – 938.2723 =  ν – e+ = 1.8 - 0.51 = 1.29 MeV

Note that according to Gell-Mann’s simple quark model with massless gluons this reaction leads to complications because the energy of massless gluons cannot turn into the mass of nucleons (See my BIG BANG MATTER ). Also it cannot tell us why neutron is unstable.

In fact as in the case of the photon absorption which leads to unstable electron orbitals in atoms one also sees that the antineutrino (ν) interacts with the extra neutral quark triad in proton (p) which is responsible for the stability of proton for creating the unstable neutron (n) as  

ν + [ 92(dud) + dud + 4u +5d ] = [92(dud) + 4u + 8d ] + e+  or  ν + dud = 3d + e+  

   Here  we observe the following conservation law  of charge and  mass:  

(-e/3 +2e/3) -3e/3) = (-3e/3) + e+ .

Surprisingly the following conservation laws of energy and mass

 1.8 + 938.2723 = 939.5656 + 0.511  or  ν + u  = d + e+    or  1.8 + 2.4 = 3.69 + 0.51 = 4.2  MeV

 reject not only Einstein’s mass-energy conservation but also the so-called weak interaction of the electroweak theory (1968) because we discovered that the antineutrino with opposite charges interacts electromagnetically with the positive up quark , like a dipolic photon of opposite charges which interacts with the electrons in atoms. ( See my QUARKS NEUTRINOS NUCLEONS AND NUCLEI ). In the same way I discovered that the  neutron with opposite charges interacts with the positive proton to give a deuteron and a photon.

 



Lk4

nuclear binding rejects relativity N.C.S.R. Demokritos (2002)

ELECTROMAGNETIC INTERACTION OF THE EXTRA CHARGED QUARKS IN NUCLEONS   LED TO MY DISCOVERY OF NUCLEAR BINDING AND STRUCTURE, WHILE THE uud AND dud SCHEMES OF GELL-MANN LEAD TO COMPLICATIONS

It is well-known that the energy of massless gluons and the so-called color forces of the Quantum Cromodynamics (Gell-mann,1973) cannot give any information about the charge distribution in nucleons for reviving the well-established laws of electromagnetism. On the other hand for my discovery of the charge distributions in ucleons due to the extra 9 charged quarks in proton and  12 ones in neutron  it was a great difficulty in discussing the problem by using a simple math of the well-established laws of Coulomb and Ampere. Under this condition I worked  from 1993 to 2002 in order to formulate a large number of integral equations presented at the 12th Symposium of the Hellenic nuclear physics Society (NCSR “Demokritos”, 2002). So in my paper NUCLEAR STRUCTURE IS GOVERNED BY THE FUNDAMENTAL LAWS OF ELECTROMAGNETISM published in Ind J. Th. Phys. (2003) one sees that the distributed fractional charges in the spinning nucleons explain not only the spin S =1 of deuteron but also give the radial binding energy of -2.2246 MeV. According to the electromagnetic laws the negligible motional EMF in the coupling of two deuterons is responsible for the strong proton-neutron bonds in the Helium nucleus with S =0 along the spin axis.

Of course the radial energy and the very strong axial energy imply a great anisotropy which explains the rapidly increase of the binding energy of deuteron to the binding energy of the Helium nucleus. Such structures show also that the so-called Pauli principle of electronic configurations is inapplicable in nuclei since the proton-proton and the neutron-neutron repel.  In fact, it is  the result of electromagnetic laws which give S=1 in the simple structure of deuteron of short ranged forces, and repulsions between identical nucleons. For example the energy of the uranium under a bombardment by neutrons is due not to Einstein’s mass-energy conservation but to the long ranged electric repulsions between protons which overcome the short ranged attractive forces between protons and neutrons, while in neutron stars the long ranged attractive force of  gravity overcomes the short-ranged electromagnetic repulsions of the neutron-neutron systems.