A New Subatomic Particle and Factor of Mass in All Matter

[crk]

Wed. June 24, 2009

A New Subatomic Particle
and
Factor of Mass in All Matter

Abstract:

Section 1

a) The understanding of subatomic structure is fundamental to the understanding of all sciences. If there were a fundamental, common factor of mass, common to all matter from the smallest subatomic particle to the universe as a whole, it would greatly improve and simplify our understanding of all things scientific.

b) This theory’s very simple and easily replicated proof is its’ novelty.

c) This theory explains observed phenomena such as:

*The Fractional Quantum Hall Effect
*The ever increasing number and proliferation of subatomic particles being discovered
*Why some electrons seem to orbit a nuclei while others are able to tunnel in
*Why neutrons decay once outside of the nucleus of an atom
*How neutrons are formed within an atom

And this theory explains:

*Why Grand Unification has been so elusive
*What the universe looked like the instant before “The Big Bang”
*And much, much more

In short, this theory provides the framework for the definitive, “Theory of Everything”.

d) The results take the form of a graphic representation of the reduction of common physical data available in any current handbook of physics and freely available from many internet sources. The meaning of the graphic representation is transparent and unambiguous.

The proof requires the use of a computer with a graphing spreadsheet program. The data are the values of the Atomic Masses of all the elements and their isotopes but only those that are derived from experimental data, not those that are purely mathematically derived.

Just for the sake of argument, if one believed they knew the value of a fundamental factor of mass, how could one prove it. After all, in spite of the very careful, deliberate and diligent efforts of experimental physicists around the world and across many decades of time and in spite of the very accurate and precise products of all that effort, we still could not expect that those data, reduced by a true factor mass, would always produce an integer result. Or even ever produce an integer result, because for all their precision, there is always a margin of error, which means there will probably always be a fractional remainder.

Since the body of data available to substantiate this theory is limited to that of the masses of the elements and their isotopes, and in order to make that data produce a graphic result that is meaningful, we should round the fractional remainder of each division to just one place of decimal, so that we can graph the frequency of how often any particular decimal value occurs. If our value for the factor is not a factor but just a random value, then the graph of the frequency of occurrence should produce a more or less horizontal line, with all fractional values receiving about the same number of hits. On the other hand, if the data is precise enough and our value for the factor of mass is indeed a factor, then there should be a preponderance of hits, tending toward the extremes of the graph near the zero(0.1) and one(0.9), and fewer hits as we progress from either end toward the center(0.5), producing a graph in the general shape of a “U”.

Bear mind, the Fractional Quantum Hall Effect, that may suggest the existence of a particle even smaller than an electron.

When a neutron is expelled from the nucleus of an atom, it decays into a proton and usually an electron, plus some other debris. If we subtract the mass of a proton from the mass of a neutron and divide the remainder by the mass of an electron, we find that the remainder is very nearly exactly two and one-half times, the mass of the electron. If this fact were the result of a laboratory experiment, the conclusion would be obvious. That the electron is not an elementary particle but is made up of two smaller particles. This notion has very wide ranging implications.

By using a factor of mass equivalent to one-half the mass of an electron, a particle I call a “Halflec” and using that value as the factor in the above describe data reduction, it is possible to produce the above mentioned “U” shaped graph. The meaning of which can not be misconstrued. Only one value could produce that graph and it can only be a true factor of mass. Which means that all subatomic particle and indeed all matter is constructed from the same fundamental building blocks of matter. The Halflec.

*N.B. It is necessary to adjust the preliminary half electron mass upward or downward incrementally, in order to bring the graph into focus and attain the very best fit. But in doing so we are able to refine that Halflec mass to a very precise value.


Section 2

The above mentioned analysis is in itself, its’ own proof. However, when and if the Large Hadron Collider is able to come online, and reach full function, it will probably be producing vast amounts of Halflecs which could be detected providing the sensors are sensitive enough and calibrated to detect such small particles.

I suspect that experimental physicists have detected Halflecs in the past but because they were not what anyone was expecting, they were ignored or rejected as systematic error or they are referred to by another monicker.

[crk]

It means that Relativity is pure fiction.

It means that matter and energy are disparate and distinct from one another and are not transmutable, one to the other.

It means that matter and energy coexist in a very compressed state in the form of Protons and Neutrons.

It means that almost all the energy released in a nuclear event like an atomic explosion, already exists within the nucleons and is only released by the addition of critical energy, not critical mass.

It means that all those subatomic particles generated by atomic colliders are not subatomic particles but merely debris.

It means that the speed of light is not a constant but is it fact relative to the frame of reference.

It means it's time to rethink what we think we know about atomic and subatomic structure.

[defg470]

I'll see to it

[michal]

I have found your post much informative.....

[crk]

Thanks for your show of interest Michal and degf470.

[crk]

A lot of people have viewed my thread but is there no one out there who is willing to do the experiment and check my findings?