Large Hadron Collider

I just did some reading up on strings. We have a shadow between two quarks and they call it a one dimensional string. They say this is a fifth dimension, the other four being space time. Then they say that because we have an inverse fourth power to the radius we need another dimension.. So our string becomes a two dimensional brane. Then they go a bit bonkers and start adding more untill we have ten dimensions, with six wrapped up so we can't see them.

Is this not too clever by half? I agree that nothing but gravity can hang about in this very small shadow. Is it really another dimension though? The shadow does have thickness, it fills the criteria for a brane. Also we can have a model in which our particle is a toroid. In whcih case the shadow is very much a tube. Only gravity could pour down it.

Actually I really like the toroidal model. It sets us up for having a helical charge round it.

Here's an article that's worth a look. it shows just how complicated this thing gets [8D] physicsweb.org/articles/world/13/11/9/1

I think it shows why Nonenta was all at sea over the Lorentzian, this guy seems confused over it as well.

In the canteen at CERN, someone says that a string is a wrapped up extra spatial demension. Fair enough, it might be helpful as a heuristic model. But no, this is really how it is!

Let's say that I announce that I'm going to do an n dimensional analysis of the English football leagues. Mark decides that he'll do the same for the Ameican football leagues. We exchange the data, and Mark tries to put it into one to one correspondence. No way can he get it to work.

So I say, "you do know that English football is actually soccer. Deduce the rules of soccer from my data then convert the data to American football. data" [] Nice but it cannot work.

So, when in doubt trot out those little helpers, the two dimensional flatlanders. Drop a sphere into there world, so that it sinks through a little bit, and say that this is a 3d force. The flatlanders "see" a circle of radius r. Let's say it's one millimeter across. Of course we can make the radius of the sphere anything we like. The radius of the flatlander's circle can still be one centimeter. Mess about with the radii of a bunch of spheres, each representing their own dimension and one can do just about anything.

[] Wendy wakes up to find a little boy crying. His shadow has got away from him and he can't get it back. The happy ending is that she sews it onto his toes.

My own shadow is not like Peter Pan's. It exists but it's not real. The far too clever people at CERN have given a shadow reality. It can do cartwheels like Peter Pan's shadow.

(Edited) [] Another fun analogy. One walks into a car hire place in Smallville. The keys are handed over, and one asks, "how long will it take to get to Clarkville?"

The hire guy says, "It's two hundred miles, a good road, a good car. Just over two hours with your foot down all the way." Righto, that sounds okay. Then this guy says, "add forty minutes for the centre of town here and there." Again, that's okay. Then he says this. "Half a mile from Clarkville, one enters an n dimensional space. Gravitational energy is leaked to a hypersphere, and that's why you slow down at the edge of town. Morerover, at each point on the highway the same thing happens but the sphere is of a much smaller 'size' and so you can do 100mph."

I would nod thoughtfully in agreement, then get out pretty fast. I might consider asking the local policeman, if he said the same, I'd get out of town very fast. []

Prior to the idea of a relativistic increase in mass of a particle, it was called an increase in electromagnetic mass.

Now, if we make h smaller by several billion we are in effect lowering the speed of light to a snail's pace, and the speed of gavity to that of light.

Our two quarks must move or collide. The shadow frustrum between them excludes all of the energy to do with electromagnetism. A totally opaque quark will exclude even ftl particles. The two quarks have charge of a third and two thirds. One is twice the mass of the other.

As mass they each have an aether atmophere. So our shadow cone can have a penubra disk round it.

Now let's say that the electomagnetic mass of the meson is the aether that surrounds our quark pair and their own aether atmospheres. This suggests that the quark mass is not an electromagnetic mass, nor is the charge some product of electromagnetism.

Anything that wants to get near the nucleus slows down through the electromagnetic aether space, then enters the region of the quarks' aether space.

Our fifteen inch shell is going very very slowly when it bounces off, or orbits. Even faster than light particles are slowed down to light speed near to a quark. The charge on the quarks can leak out between the disks of aether that surround each quark.

If charge is not an elecromagnetic effect, then it's small wonder that a charged particle doesn't want to go faster than light. It conserves its charge.

(Edited) Almost forgot [] This is a meson, it's unstable. For a proton of three quarks we must be dealing with a three body problem. So, an e.m. mass centre, outside of the shadows, an ftl mass centre, again outside the shadows, which can move faster than light, and an ftl charge. Somehow they preserve balance, unless disrupted.

A couple of mistakes there [] I talked about charge as a leak to the surface. What I meant to say was that the meson, as a boson, has to show its charge to other particles.

The other mistake is where I was talking about mass centres moving faster than light. It has to be understood that next to the shadow, light is almost stopped but the ftl particles are now travelling at light speed.

The charge repulsion is then not electromagnetic, so I don't think we need do do horrible 3 body maths, for the proton and neutron.

Now, the centre of mass of our two quarks is at a third of h and the charges are a third and two thirds. If charge is electromagnetic in nature, then there would be problems but if it's down gravity then we have a balance. The two quarks are wobbling in their overall bosonic aether envelope, which isn't wobbling. That wobble has to alter the aether density of the boson.

However, that would raise questions about the shape of the disk between the two quarks. Does it warp, rather like the front and back of the brim of a fedora hat?

I suppose I'm saying that the meson operates as a bose einstein condensate. The people who are doing the experiments on this, mainly at CERN, make faster than light aspects of it, negative. That's simply because they are trying to get round relativity theory. It leads to absurdities. Information arriving before it's sent.

This model doesn't have that problem. Light is slowed down to almost zero but it never goes negative. In that tiny gap though, we can still have all of the zpe strangeness going on. Near the shadow, light can only have incredibly short wavelengths, across the disk gap, that means high energy. The two quarks have major entropy problems, one needs to rob the other because this shadow wants to suck them dry.

I don't know [] I'm toying with the idea of an aether "melt" along the penumbra disk that separates the two quarks.

[] You know, i'm rather surprised that this has not got any comments. The energy inside the nucleus is vastly greater than that of mc^2 Suppose that high energy cosmic rays are safety valves on "oil tanks" [8D] Would it be okay for me to start firing a rifle in this "plant"? Of course I would not fire a bullet that had more energy than was being released by the pressure valves. So it would be perfectly safe [][8D]

Sloat, I would like to comment but why do you not address my questions about mass, force, momentum and energy?

Because next to a le sage quark shadow, we can't be talking about electromagnetic mass. We are talking about gravitational mass. Scale our two quarks up to planet size and the gap between them is about 26 light years. The aether atmosphere round them, where cassimer forces begin to apply, is about 10 to the 31 light years.

Scale them back down again and it should become obvious that at about 1 millimeter, the force of gravity is minute. Next to the shadow cone however, the energies are extremely vast. They are not electromagnetic in nature though. We can't say that a quark has a mass of so many Gev. We would be talking in terms of mass being down to e = m c ^2 and that energy is excluded from the shadow region.

A question that I find interesting, is that of the charge. I believe it to be a property of gravitational mass, and not electromagnetic mass. Our two quarks "wobble" round their common mass centre. Alter the charges, so that they still add up to one, and the wobble has to change. A third plus two thirds is rather nice in that case.