Gravity, Strong Force, Zero Inventory Nuclear Reactor and Magnetism by Bengt Nyman
Gravity is one phenomenon in physics which has been well observed but poorly understood. The Standard Model, which describes and explains most of what physics has learned so far has been unable to include gravity. To date the model includes a particle named graviton as a carrier for gravitational force. The particle graviton has never been seen or traced.
A quotation from the European organization for Nuclear Research in Cern summarizes the Standard Model:
“There are four fundamental forces at work in the Universe: the strong force, the weak force, the electromagnetic force, and the gravitational force. They work over different ranges and have different strengths. Gravity is the weakest but it has an infinite range. The electromagnetic force also has infinite range but it is many times stronger than gravity. The weak and strong forces are effective only over a very short range and dominate only at the level of subatomic particles. Despite its name, the weak force is much stronger than gravity but it is indeed the weakest of the other three. The strong force is, as the name says, the strongest among all the four fundamental interactions. We know that three of the fundamental forces result from the exchange of force carrier particles, which belong to a broader group called ‘bosons’. Matter particles transfer discrete amounts of energy by exchanging bosons with each other. Each fundamental force has its own corresponding boson particle. The strong force is carried by the ‘gluon’, the electromagnetic force is carried by the ‘photon’, and the ‘W and Z bosons’ are responsible for the weak force. Although not yet found, the ‘graviton’ should be the corresponding force-carrying particle of gravity.
The Standard Model includes the electromagnetic, strong and weak forces and all their carrier particles, and explains extremely well how these forces act on all the matter particles. However, the most familiar force in our everyday lives, gravity, is not part of the Standard Model. In fact, fitting gravity comfortably into the framework has proved to be a difficult challenge. The quantum theory used to describe the micro world, and the general theory of relativity used to describe the macro world, are like two children who refuse to play nicely together. No one has managed to make the two mathematically compatible in the context of the Standard Model. But luckily for particle physics, when it comes to the minuscule scale of particles, the effect of gravity is so weak as to be negligible. Only when we have matter in bulk, such as in ourselves or in planets, does the effect of gravity dominate. So the Standard Model still works well despite its reluctant exclusion of one of the fundamental forces.”
End of Quote.
What I will be offering herein is a finer dissection of the forces described above. The result is an explanation of gravity and strong force as composite forces of many vectors of one single type of force which we could call the electrostatic force.
We are then left with only two types of forces: The electromagnetic force and the electrostatic force. The bosons named gravitons and gluons need no longer be regarded as particles but rather as historic names for composites of multiple electrostatic force vectors.
The following hypothesis offers an explanation for the mechanism of gravity.
The hypothesis presented herein claims that gravity is the result of composite electrostatic forces between electrical charges in particles and bodies. To understand the mechanism I am suggesting that we introduce one neutron into a brand new and otherwise empty universe. In this scenario the neutron is free from external influences. The neutron is at rest and externally neutral because the 2/3 e positively charged U-quark is flanked by the two 1/3 e negatively charged D-quarks, and there are no external influences.
Let us now introduce a second neutron into this new universe. According to computer simulations executed in Interactive Physics software as well as in Newton software, the six quarks in the two neutrons quickly align themselves into two separate lines where one negatively charged D-quark in one neutron takes aim at the positively charged U-quark in the center of the other neutron.
The Interactive Charge Posturing seen in the simulations and described above is a direct result of attracting constituents minimizing their distance while repelling constituents maximize theirs. The consequence is that the distance between attracting constituents become marginally shorter than that of repelling constituents resulting in a dominance of the attracting forces over repelling forces. In computer simulations the two neutrons invariably posture themselves as described and start accelerating toward each other. In case of a large distance between the neutrons compared to the size of the quarks, the net attracting force is very small. However, simulations show that after the rapid Interactive Posturing of the quarks in each neutron, the two neutrons invariably begin a slow acceleration toward each other.
A static, longhand mathematical treatment of the situation described above yields the same result showing that the attraction forces always dominate over the repulsion forces.
I am suggesting that the electrical charge interactions and charge posturing described above cause what we refer to as gravity.
In an attempt to quantity this situation I am offering the results of two mathematical calculations. The first one looks at gravity between two hydrogen atoms. My hypothesis suggests that the proton in one hydrogen atom will attract the electron in the second hydrogen atom and vice verse causing a minor shift in the center of effort of the orbits of the two electrons around their protons thereby transforming both hydrogen atoms into conditional dipoles. The question is now, how large would this shift have to be to correspond to the observed gravity between two hydrogen atoms?
The answer is: At a distance of 1 x 10^-12 meters between the two hydrogen atoms, the dipole distance of each hydrogen atom would be 3.672300 * 10^-31 meter, which is 6.939 * 10^-21 of the radius of the hydrogen atom, or 4.424 * 10^-18 of the radius of the proton. In other words the charge shift or dipole distance required is extremely small, even compared to the radius of the proton.
A second attempt to quantify this hypothesis calculates the visible or virtual charge that a conditional dipole translates into, looking at it from the outside. Comparing gravity observed between two known masses with force observed between two known charges yields that two 1 kg masses experience each other as a net and opposite charge of 8.6175^-11 Coulombs. If we apply this to the two hydrogen atoms, a virtual dipole charge equivalent to 9.0088 * 10^-19 of the charge of one electron suffices to produce gravity. In other words, two bodies have to show each other very little dipolarity, to produce gravity.
Electrical charges of the constituents inside particles, nuclei and atoms are very large, and the forces between them are very strong.
The thought that these charges are totally insensitive to electrical charges in their surroundings is an assumption which no longer serves us. I believe that a closer look at the interaction between bodies containing electrical charges will confirm interactive charge influences, interactive charge posturing and electrostatic dipole attraction resulting in gravity.
Links to Neutron Gravity simulations:
Due to the uncertainties about the exact arrangement and degrees of freedom of the quarks in a neutron I have included three different cases. All three cases produce similar Charge Posturing and the same Electric Gravity result. The final simulation shows Charge Posturing and Electric Gravity between two neutrons in 3D.
2D Charge Posturing and Gravity between 2 neutrons with trapped quarks:
2D Charge Posturing and Gravity between 2 neutrons with coupled D-quarks:
2D Charge Posturing and Gravity between 2 neutrons with free quarks:
3D Charge Posturing and ES Gravity between 2 neutrons:
Links to Hydrogen Gravity simulations
2D Charge Posturing, Dipole formation and Gravity between 2 simulated hydrogen atoms:
2D Charge Posturing, Dipole formation and Gravity between 2 complete hydrogen atoms:
2D Charge Posturing, Dipole formation and Gravity between 2 hydrogen atoms with free quarks:
The big red spheres in the simulation below represent the electron shells, or the diameter, at which the hydrogen electrons orbit around the hydrogen proton nuclei. At the center of each resides one +e positively charged proton. The small green spheres around each hydrogen nucleus represent the indeterminable location of one electron. All the green spheres around each hydrogen proton together representthe probabilistic location of one -e negatively charged electron. The simulation demonstrates the spontaneous but invisible dipole formation of each hydrogen atom leading to attraction, which we know as gravity, between the two hydrogen atoms.
3D Charge Posturing, Dipole formation and ES Gravity between 2 hydrogen atoms.
Strong Force between two protons
In today’s Standard Model, Strong Force is considered one of the four fundamental forces in the universe. Strong Force is described as the strongest of the four forces and as having the shortest reach.
The composite dipole hypothesis described below suggests that Strong Force is the result of a multitude of dipole force vectors. These force vectors are both attracting and repelling. The fact that these different dipole forces are based on different dipole distances creates a complex resultant which is highly dependant on the distance between the particles.
Let us start with two free protons placed in the vicinity of each other. Looking closer at the protons we know that they each consist of a group of three quarks. There is one external ES force vector between each quark in one proton and each quark in the other proton, for a total of nine external ES force vectors.
Now let us force these protons closer together. So close that the cheeks of the protons are no further apart than the quarks in one of the protons. At least one of the quarks in proton 1 is now very close to one of the quarks in proton 2. If these close-up quarks are of the same charge it is easy to see that the composite force is likely to be repulsing. Because even if the remaining and more distant quark charges attract each other they are disadvantaged by their longer separation distance.
However if these nearby charges happen to be attracting each other while the more distant charges repel each other it would appear that the situation could turn out differently.
Simulations made with two different kinds of physics software both show the following:
1. Two protons placed closely together will repel each other most of the time.
2. Two protons shot at each other will bounce off and repel each other most of the time.
3. However, it is occasionally possible to shoot two protons at each other with the right speed and quark positions so that they latch on to each other, fuse and stay together, held in place by Strong Force. See simulation links below.
Two protons affect each other with a total of nine ES force vectors. Five of these are repelling and four are attracting. At most distances between the protons these vectors add up to a resultant which is an overwhelmingly repelling force.
However, once two protons come close enough to each other, with the right quark postures, they fuse and latch together with Strong Force.
Strong Force is a conditional resultant force made up of nine force vectors. Strong Force depends on very close distances between attracting constituents to remain positive.
If we could grab two fused protons and start pulling them apart we would find that as we increase the gap between the attracting quarks the Strong Force weakens very quickly. Very soon we would reach the mathematical crossover point where the resultant of the nine ES force vectors becomes zero and where the two protons loose their grip on each other. This is where Strong Force goes to zero, changes its name and transforms into a much weaker, nine component repelling force, which we know as repulsion between similarly charged objects.
Links to Strong Force simulations:
2D Repulsion between 2 protons
2D Collision between 2 protons
2D Special collision between 2 protons producing Fusion and Strong Force
Please note the very similar initial conditions in the two simulations below;
In the first simulation the two protons are placed just outside the reach of the Strong Force resulting in repulsion between the protons.
In the second simulation the protons are placed just inside the reach of the Strong Force resulting in fusion of the two protons.
3D Charge Posturing and ES repulsion between 2 protons
3D Charge Posturing and ES Strong Force between 2 protons
Binding Energy, ES Strong Force and Strong Force Reach
The above proton simulations suggest a specific quark posture between two fused protons. The same posturing is applied to the protons and quarks shown below in an attempt to quantify ES Strong Force and Strong Force Reach:
The forces involved are calculated below as a function of known binding energy:
The Effective Quark Radius used above expresses the inverse degree of freedom, or posturing space, that the quarks have within the protons.
Please note that this value has been selected to produce a binding energy that matches known proton binding energy. This is done to show that ES attraction/repulsion and subsequent Charge Posturing is theoretically sufficient to cause the mechanism that we call strong force between two protons. It is also done to arrive at an Effective Quark Radius that can be used to test the credibility of this hypothesis in coming examples and calculations.
Strong force in Deuterium
The atom nucleus of Deuterium consists of one proton and one neutron. As compared to the case of two protons, Deuterium forms readily, is relatively stable and possesses a high binding energy. See link to posturing simulation below:
3D Charge Posturing and ES Strong Force between 1 proton and 1 neutron forming Deuterium;
The above simulations suggest a specific quark posture between the fused proton and neutron. The posturing is symmetrical and three dimensional. The same posturing is applied to the protons and quarks shown below in two views. Three dimensional design software was used to reconstruct the nucleus of Deuterium in accordance with the simulation results above to establish an accurate nucleus geometry and the 3D quark distances seen below:
Using the effective quark radius calculated in the case of strong force between two protons we can now test our ES Strong Force hypothesis by calculating the theoretical binding energy in Deuterium and compare it to the known binding energy:
Note that the ES strong force, or binding force in Deuterium never goes to zero why the integration of the binding energy theoretically can go on for ever. In this case the energy integration is stopped at a distance between proton and neutron where the ES strong force falls below 1/1000 of the contact strong force.
Also note that the theoretically calculated ES Strong Force produces a binding energy which is identical to the known binding energy. This is a remarkable result and I interpret it as strong support for the fact that what we call strong force is caused by the complex composite of electro static forces between electrically charged nuclei constituents shown above.
The quark family
Anatomy of the hadrons
To continue the analysis and quantification of ES Strong Force and ES Binding Energy for larger nuclei we first have to make a minor detour. The presently most popular models and depictions of the proton and the neutron rely on several flavors, or charges, of quarks as well as on a color charge to explain the forces between quarks of similar flavor. The simplification proposed below accounts for the forces inside and between protons and neutrons in a simpler way and facilitates calculating ES Binding Energy for larger nuclei in agreement with known values.
The following offers a quick look at the quark family together with more revealing models of the proton and the neutron. These more detailed models of the proton and the neutron more accurately tracks their electrical constituents. This is important in mapping ES relationships within and between protons and neutrons and helps solving some of the mysteries remaining in the Standard Model.
Many types of extremely short lived quarks have been observed in particle collision experiments. The following focuses on the two primary types of stable quarks that make up protons and neutrons, namely the Up Quark and the Down Quark.
The smallest, lightest and most basic of the quarks is the Up Quark with a charge of +2/3e.
The second most stable and basic of the quarks is the Down Quark with a charge of -1/3. A down quark consists of one up quark and one electron plus their binding energy. The difference in charge betwen the two is consequently that of the electron, or -1e.
The proton is today described as consisting of two +2/3e up quarks and one -1/3e down quark, The neutron is described as consisting of one +2/3 up quark and two -1/3e down quarks.
In the 2D and 3D computer simulations that I have performed to analyze the nature of Gravity and Strong Force the above way of looking at quarks as whole, positively or negatively charged quarks does not fully explain the interaction between quarks or between hadrons. It supports the ES attraction observed between dissimilarly charged quarks, but it does not support or explain the adhesion between two similarly charged quarks observed in the triangular geometry of protons and neutrons. The present concept of whole, negative and positive quarks would give both the proton and the neutron a straight, inline geometric shape rather than the triangular form observed. The present vision also fails to support accurate quantification of binding energies in larger nuclei.
As a refinement to the Standard Model I am suggesting that the base for the quark family is the Naked Quark that we know as an up quark. It is also suggested that all quarks are made up of a naked quark accompanied by some form of negatively charged companion. The naked quark is a unit of mass with a void of negative electrical charge. Compared to the average ES Earth Charge a naked quark lacks 2/3 of an elementary –e charge. We therefore say that it has a +2/3e positive charge.
As a consequence of the naked quark being deficient in negative charge it attracts constituents with a negative charge. The naked quark can be seen temporarily or permanently disguised in different forms of negatively charged coverings giving rise to the idea of different flavors and color charges of quarks. The electron, our primary carrier of negative charge, is often seen accompanying a naked quark. The pair appears like a -1/3e negatively charged quark, sometimes called a Down Quark. To be able to more accurately map and calculate the ES relationships between quarks and hadrons the down quark will in the following be treated as a Naked Quark accompanied by an Electron.
Proposed anatomy of protons and neutrons
The proposed quark anatomies of the proton and the neutron are therefore the same and consist of three +2/3e Naked Quarks. The three naked quarks in the proton are held together by one electron residing at the hub of the triangle of the three quarks. The three naked quarks plus one electron give the proton an overall charge of +1e. However, the proton has three externally exposed constituents with a charge of +2/3 and one with a charge of -1e. This polarized constitution of hadrons play a key role in ES Dipole formation and subsequent ES Gravity discussed earlier. This same polarization and potential ES attachment points also play a key role in producing and explaining ES Strong Force and in quantifying ES Binding Energy.
See proposed 3D model of the Proton in the simulation below:
The three naked quarks in the neutron are held together by two electrons. The electrons reside at the hub of the triangle of the three quarks, one on each side of the hub. The three naked quarks plus two electrons give the neutron an overall charge of 0. However, the neutron has three externally exposed constituents with a charge of +2/3e and two with a charge of -1e. These potential ES attachment points play a key role in producing and explaining ES Strong Force and in quantifying ES Binding Energy.
See proposed 3D model of the Neutron in the simulation below:
Gravity, Strong Force, Deuterium and Tritium revisited
The 3D simulations shown below use the proton and neutron models proposed above.
These simulations show behaviors very similar to those shown earlier using the older models of positively and negatively charged quarks. The difference is that the older models fail to support quantification of known binding energies in larger nuclei, whereas the new models support ES Gravity and ES Strong Force as well as calculation of ES binding energies in larger nuclei.
Proton Strong Force:
Please note the initial position in this simulation resulting in ES attraction and ES strong force compared to the previous simulation where the only slightly different initial position results in ES repulsion.
Formation of Deuterium:
Formation of Tritium:
The naked quarks in the hadrons are all identical but are here shown in different colors to make it easier to identify the original proton and neutron geometries after fusion.
A free neutron, consisting of a Three Leaf Naked Quark Clover and two Electrons, is known not to be very stable. Simulations suggest that the degree of stability has to do with the size of Stationary Electrons in relation to the Quark Clover. Spontaneous decay of a neutron into a proton is the result of the marginal stability of the two electrons in the neutron compared to the substantially greater stability of one electron in a proton. It appears that a well directed collision between a passing electron and a neutron is sufficient to reduce the neutron into a proton.
At the same time, a well directed high energy collision between an electron and a proton is known to be able to create a Temporary Neutron.
Electron collides with a Neutron to produce a Proton and two Free Electrons:
High energy Electron collides with a Proton to produce a Temporary Neutron:
Please keep in mind that realistically simulating high speed collisions of subatomic particles would require knowing a lot more about the particles than what we know today. The ES simulations above are attempts to test and illustrate ideas about slow, subatomic electrostatic relationships. However, the same models are greatly insufficient to represent any true dynamic behavior of high speed subatomic particle collisions. The last two simulations above should therefore be regarded only as illustrations of events that have been observed and documented elsewhere.
Unlocking Strong Force
Nuclear Energy On Demand
The Zero Inventory Reactor
Present and planned nuclear reactors have a large inventory of a radioactive material which spontaneously starts a nuclear fission chain reaction. Due to the large amount of radioactive material in these reactors they will run away and melt down if external processes fail to control and modulate the reaction.
The concept of the spontaneous nuclear reactor is many years old and is no longer compatible with modern safety requirements. In an attempt to improve the safety of today's inherently unstable nuclear reactors, layers upon layers of controls and safety controls have been added to the design of the reactors. The result is escalated cost of construction and operation of today's reactors, without a solution to their inherent stability problem.
RIMCON Resonance Induced Matter Converter
A new method for releasing energy from large atom nuclei is proposed below. The method is based on earlier described understanding of strong force and nuclear binding energy.
Neutrons and protons on the surface of large nuclei are held in place by strong force. Strong force is an elastic, electrostatic bond resulting from a large number of competing electrostatic forces. The strong force bond between a neutron and a large nucleus has a natural frequency in the range of 10^19 to 10^20 Hz. Tuned X-rays of the same frequency are proposed to bring strong force bonds into resonance to shake loose neutrons and their binding energy from large nuclei like for example Thorium.
The proposed Resonance Induced Matter Converter works as follows:
The conversion fuel is primarily Thorium which is fed into the converter in form of a Thorium wire with an iron core. Two lasers are used to elevate the temperature of the fuel wire in the conversion zone. Two X-ray guns are used to set the neutron strong force bonds into resonance to break lose neutrons and their binding energy.
The reaction takes place in a nitrogen atmosphere. Neutrons and much of the gamma radiation is absorbed by the converter's water heat exchanger encircling the conversion zone. The converter vessel is pressurized with a nitrogen atmosphere equal to the pressure in the heat exchanger. Superheated steam from the heat exchanger is used to produce heating and electricity the conventional way.
The iron core of the burned out fuel wire is fed through the converter and wound back up after exiting the conversion zone.
Any hydrogen produced by the conversion is separated from the nitrogen atmosphere and removed from the vessel.
If the X-ray ignition system of a RIMCON converter is turned off or fails, the reaction stops.
If the Thorium fuel wire feed is stopped or fails, the reaction stops.
Runaway and melt down of a RIMCON converter is inconceivable since there is no permanent inventory in the converter.
Dark Energy and Magnetism
As described above the forces of gravity and strong force have their roots in the interaction between electrostatic dipoles.
The Standard Model suggests that there is invisible energy in the universe beyond that of invisible EM radiation. The Standard Model calls this Dark Energy.
Let us envision dark energy as an aether of elementary energy strings which carry both positive and negative charge. When left alone an energy string is curled up to where the center of the negative electrical charge coincides with the center of the positive electrical charge. In this state the energy string is electrically “neutral” and does not show any electrical charge to the outside world. When two energy strings get close to each other they become polarized showing each other a charge gradient. They are now dipoles with the ability to both attract and repel each other.
Through experiments and observations we have learned to describe magnetic fields and their interactions with electrical currents and more. Yet, we have no explanation for what causes these actions at a distance and what causes remote magnetic actions and reactions without a known carrier.
The model of a magnetic field is a very convenient construct for mapping and quantifying magnetic effects. But it is also a very devious and misleading model as our imaginary field lines reach out into space possibly giving us the impression that they are the carrier of remote magnetic effects. They are not. They are merely a way to map and quantify an effect, the cause of which we yet have to understand.
So for a moment, please forget the idea of a magnetic field and ask yourself what is truly the mechanism behind and the carrier of magnetism.
Let us start with the case of two parallel electrical conductors. Observations tell us that electrical currents flowing in the same direction through the two parallel conductors cause the two conductors to attract each other. Flowing electrical currents in opposite directions cause the conductors to repel each other. The question is, why do they do this.
Think of a conductor as mostly empty space, occupied by a cylindrical lattice of conductive atoms. The conductive atoms consist of mostly empty space between the atom nuclei and their electrons. Now add the pinball like stampede of electrons as a result of the electrical current flowing through the conductor.
According to the standard model 70% of all energy in the universe is dark energy.
Consequently, the conductors in the example above contain 2.3 times more energy in form of neutrinos and elementary energy strings than it does in form of atoms in the conductors and air between and around them.
Therefore, in the example above, when we start the electrons rushing through our two conductors, the negative charge of the rushing electrons polarize adjacent neutrinos and energy strings which induces a secondary flow of strings in, around and between the conductors. If these two flows of strings are unidirectional, Daniel Bernoulli told us already in 1738 what to expect. We get a force pulling the two conductors together. Conversely, if the two currents flow in opposite directions we get a force pushing the conductors apart.
To further test this hypothesis let us look at another common but yet unexplained magnetic phenomena, an electric motor.
A straight electrical conductor runs past the cylindrical end of a coiled electrical conductor. We now apply a voltage across the two ends of the coiled conductor. Electrons start flowing through the coil. The circular flow of electrons around the axis of the coil also induces a vortex of energy strings in and around the cylindrical coil. This vortex of strings flairs out past the end of the cylindrical coil. The straight conductor running by the end of the coil rests peacefully in the middle of this string vortex. We now apply a voltage across the ends of the straight conductor. The electron flow through the straight conductor induces a flow of energy strings along the straight conductor. We now have a linear flow of strings perpendicular to a vortex of strings generated by the coil. Daniel Bernoulli probably studied this as well, but a more modern study is that of a dimpled golf ball flying with backspin. The collision of opposing air flows under the golf ball compared to the unidirectional air flows above the golf ball creates a pressure differential which lifts the golf ball and keeps it flying longer.
Similarly, where the linear flow of neutrinos and strings collide with the opposite direction of the vortex of neutrinos and strings, the energy partial pressure becomes higher than where the two flows are unidirectional. As a result the pressure differential attempts to move the conductor.
The dipole hypothesis described above explains and quantifies the mechanisms of gravity and strong force.
The theories about dark energy is supported by the Standard Model.
The hypothesis about elementary, dipole-capable neutrinos and energy strings expands the dipole hypothesis to explain the carriage of magnetism.
1996-2013 Bengt Nyman