Give
me the simplest form of
matter
and motion,
and I will build, out of them, the world
of Nature.
"Give me matter,
and I will construct a world out of it."
Immanuel
Kant, Kant's Cosmology
("Universal
Natural History and Theory Of
Heavens")
11.
Pulsagons with Their Opposed Primal Imprints:
Gravity and Caloric Heat
We
ended the previous page by marveling at the
intriguing pulsagons
(PUGs)
that
generate, around them, a permanent influx
field
(infield)
punctuated by releases of periodic
outflux
bursts of
packets of energy
radiation
(erad),
called ergons.
It is now the scope of this page to take a
closer look at those intriguing PUGs
that are of two types: regular and
elusive. The
regular
ones are the hardtron
while the elusive
ones are the softelon.
Because each PUG
generates independently an influx field
(infield)
around it, that will create between any two
PUGs
a low dense (lowden) environmental
xenofluid. That
lowden
is the key in understanding gravity for
each of the two types, (hardtronor
softelon),
of PUGsas revealed below.
<I>
We
start our PUG
study with the hardtron
class that is represented by the
proton
particle.
Let
m1and
m2
be any two masses. Due to their
corresponding infieldscreated
around them by their respective
protons,
a low dense (lowden)
environmental xenofluidwill
be created between them. That
lowden,
by the Downfalllaw,
will make those two masses to "fall"
instantly, independently and
concomitantly towards the middle of
that created
lowden.
And that instantaneous "slide"
or "fall" towards each other, due to
lowden,
is what is known today as the
gravity.
Thus, gravity is not a force of
anything, but is a
conduit
condition
(concon)
making any two distant masses to move
or "fall" instantaneously towards each
other.
Thus, a force of gravity, per
se, does not exist in Nature. What it
does exist however is a
concon
for the two masses, regardless of how
distant apart they may be, to
instantaneously be made to move one
towards the other. As such, to stress
again, There
is no force of gravitation, nor is
there a speed of
gravity...
To reflect that
protons
are underneath connected to the
formation of gravity,
we
call them in here
as
gravitons.
And,
We call gravitational conduit
(gravicon),
the lowden
generated from gravitons. Let's
now note that Newton's celebrated
gravitational formula is nothing but
the Inverse-Square
Law of Nature (ISLON).
It
represents ISLONas
a stunningly correct measurement of the
apparent attraction that appears
to exist between any two masses
situated apart at a distance
r.
That is an apparent and not a
real attraction exerted by the
two masses.
And that is because their
"slide"
towards their common lowden
center is being masked as an attraction
between them which clearly it is not.
There is no such an inner attraction
between them, but what it is --is an
independent and concomitant "slide"
towards each other, into their common
lowden
pursuant to the Downlev
--that ultimate
physical law of Nature
(UPLON).
Recaping
on the nature of
Gravity:
Gravity,
as stated, is NOT a force per
se, but is a
conduit condition
(concon)
that generate any two distant
masses to move or "slide"
instantaneously towards the
center of their common
gravicon.
.
On
Newton's Stunning Recognition
of Gravity's Underneath
Substratum
At
the end of his seminal
Opticks book, Newton
concludes with the posting of
a number Queries "in order to
a farther search to be made by
others." [Opticks, Dover
Publ., 1952, p. 339.]
And in Query 21,
[ibidem, pp.
350-351], Newton "dances"
with these ideas that are
indeed identical to the ones
cemented here in our theory of
gravity whose underneath is
Downlev:
Is
it not that "...
every Body ... go(es)
from the denser parts
of the Medium towards
the rarer?",
and
That "if the elastick
force of this Medium
be exceeding
great, it may
suffice to impel
Bodies from the
denser parts of the
Medium towards the
rarer, with all that
power which we call
Gravity."
[Underline
supplied.}
Additional
Fundamental
Remarks:
1.
As already noted,
Newton's formula of universal
gravitation (above)
is nothing else but a
geometrical application (in an
Euclidean space) of a point
source (S) spreading its
influence equally, in all
directions, obeying the
Inverse-Square
Law of Nature
(ISLON).
2.
Erroneously, it has been
assumed that
gravity
is being transmitted
instantaneously, when in fact,
as stressed above, there is no
transmission to begin with.
That error springs from the
fact of lacking the
recognition that each
individual material object
starts generating its own
independent inwards
infield.
As such, any two (2) masses
generate between them an
environmental depression, the
lowden,
which will make them to
"slide" instantly and
simultaneously towards the
center of their created
environmental xenofluid
depression, appearing, as
such, that by moving towards
each other, an attraction
force will exist between those
two masses.
3.
As already alluded, much
confusion still exists with
respect to the physical nature
of Newton's gravitational
constant
G.
Nowaday, that big
G
is being defined as an
empirical "proportionality"
constant leaving asides its
physical nature. Newton
himself was silent on the
exact physical nature of the
big
G.
In his seminal
Principia
(ibidem,
Vol I, p. 198, Proposition
LXXYI, Theorem XXXVI), he only
talks about a
"proportionality" that exists
in his gravitational formula
given in a 2-sphere example,
as follows:
"...
the attractive force
of every point
decreases as the
square of the
distance of the body
attracted: I say,
that the whole force
with which one of
these spheres
attracts the other
will be inversely
proportional
to the square of the
distance of the
centers."
[underline
supplied]
Furthermore, it should be
noted, that in Newton's theory
of gravitation (as oppose to
the one provided in TRUTON),
there is no mediator of
gravity that is being provided
nor was there an explanation
provided of HOW gravity is
being transmitted, transported
or conveyed.
On
the Physical
Connotation of
Newton's
Proportionality
Constant
G
The
"bottom" of the
xenofluid
(XF)
medium is the
non-stretchable
xenobase(XB)-medium.
H.
Cavendish
The ratio of the
density
(D)
of the
xenofluid
(XF)
to
thedensity
(D)of
the
xenobase
(XB)
is
known today as the
specific gravity
(SG). Thus, for a
given volume
V,
we can write that
SG(V)=D(XF)/D(XB).
That
SG
is no other than the
big
Gfrom
the Newton's formula
of gravity. (By the
way, it is worth
mentioning that
Henry
Cavendish when
performed his famous
experiment attributed
to be the first who
measured the big
G,
measured in fact the
specific
gravity
of
the
Earth.)
The
existence of
G
is a direct
reflection that
gravity
can exist only in a
material
environmentalmedium
(aka, the
xenofluid
medium) that must
have a stable
impenetrable bottom
density that only the
non-stretchable
xenobase
(XB)
platform
can
provide.
Newton's
gravitational
constant
G
stays quasi-constant
in a particular
quasi-constant
environmental
xenofluid
(eXF)
medium. However, the
value of that
constant
G
is lower or higher if
the
eXF
is a lowden
or a high dense
xenofluid
medium,
respectively. As
such, the value of
the big
G
is not the same
throughout the
Universe being
therefore a "local"
rather than a
"global" or
"universal" constant.
Footnote: Over
some 40 years,
Newton's
gravitational
constant
G
has
been measured
about a dozen of
times. Those
measurements
appear to show
that Newton's
gravitational
constant
G
is not quite
constant
exhibiting in fact
a cyclic
fluctuation of a
periodicity of 5.9
years.
See
for
instance,
the 2015
posting
in
<phys.org>
entitled
"Why
Do
Measurements
of the
Gravitational
Constant
Vary So
Much?"
by Lisa
Zyga
or
the 2015
paper of
J. D.
Anderson,
et al.
entitled
"Measurements
of
Newton's
Gravitational
Constant
and the
Length of
Day"
in
EuroPhysics
Letter
(EPL) 110
(2015)
10002.
How
this can
be?
The
explanation of
those cyclical
variations for the
value of the
gravitational
constant
G
obtained
here, on Earth, is
that here on
Earth, we are
subject to (and at
the mercy of) a
fluctuating solar
irradiance that is
part of the solar
11-year period
cyclical activity.
And that solar
cyclical activity
is being
transmitted to us
in the form of
cyclical
fluctuations in
the content of our
surrounding
environmental
xenofluid (eXF)
medium.
Due
to that fluctuated
solar cyclical
activity, the
Earth's rotation
around its axis of
spin
compounded
with
the tidal friction
of the Moon is
being fluctuated,
accordingly. The
constant
G
measured
on Earth, of
course, cannot
remain immune and
is being affected,
as
well.
How
exactly the
5.9-year
cyclicality in the
value of
G
is
being obtained,
that is about half
of the 11-year
solar cycle, is
still an open
question that
needs to be worked
out.
Galileo
Galilei,
A Giant Among
Giants...
.Aside
from elucidating the nature of the
gravitational
constant G,
another much older issue with
gravity
was the one with respect to the gravitational
accelerationg that, for some
two milenia, has held the
Aristotle's
view that objects fall to Earth at a speed that
is proportional to their weights: the heavier
they are, the greater their falling speeds would
be.
Galileo
Galilei:
.
It
was the genius of Galileo
Galilei
that, for the fist time, challenged and
demolished that long held Aristotelian view on
the gravitational
accelerationg,
by recognizing --before the existence of
Newton's gravitational theory-- that in fact,
two or more masses of different weights dropped,
at the same time from the same height, will fall
on Earth's surface at the same time, defying
thus, in a rather blatant way not only the
Aristotelian view, but also, quite frankly, our
own given Common Sense!
How
such a thing is possible to be, as our Common
Sense (comsen)
will show outright strong reservation on
Galileo's radical pronouncement? Why not,
one may ask,
a heavier mass is not being pulled more
forcefully by the Earth's gravity than that of a
lighter one?
Galileo
conducted a number of experiments with rolling
balls of different weights on down inclined
planes. He found that all balls fell with the
same acceleration rate regardless of their
weight! From those rather simple experiments,
Gallileo extended mentally those results from
inclined plans to vertical ones resulting to
envision that objects of different weights, when
dropped simultaneously from an arbitrary
altitude will reach the Earth's surface at the
same time regardless of their weight.
WOW!
That
truly remarkable visualization and recognition
by Galileo Galilei is now being cemented anew
through logic and deductive reasoning, one
supplied by Galileo himself, the other supplied
by us.
We
start by asking this basic gravitational
question:
If
an object has more mass, then WHY not a
heavier mass will fall faster than a
lighter one as dictated by our
comsen
that happens to be in concert with the
view of
Aristotle? In
other words, WHY should we accept
Galileo's radical pronouncement that
objects of different masses will fall
to Earth at the same time, all with the
same
speed?
Well,
we answer this, as Galileo did, using our given
logic through a method, widely used now in
Mathematics, called Reductio ad
Absurdum and formulate
Galileo's
Free Fall Gravitational Theory for
Objects Close to Earth's
Surface
Regardless
of their masses or
sizes,
all objects near the surface
of Earth,
when dropped from the same
altitude, will fall to Earth
at the same speed. In the mathematical
lingo,
that principle can be
expressed by saying that Material objects near the
Earth's surface, regardles of
their masses or sizes,
are equivalent modulo
Earth's gravitational
acceleration g.
Proofs
by"Reductio ad
Absurdum":
(A
'Reduction to the Absurd'
Proof or 'Proof by
Contradiction') is the proof
where it is assumed that the
contrary is true and using
deductive reasoning, we reach
an absurdity.
We
begin our proofs with the assumption
that Aristotle's doctrine is true,
i.e., that the heavier objects fall
faster than the lighter ones.
Proof
1 by Galileo Galilei:
"All
truths are easy to understand once
they are discovered; the point is to
discover
them."
.In
his celebrated book "Dialogues
Concerning Two New Sciences,"
[¶ 109, p.64],
Galileo advanced a stunningly
beautiful argument against
Aristotle's view of falling bodies,
a proof that now is being
paraphrased below.
.Assuming
that the Aristotle's
proposition
was true, Galileo suggested a truly
beautiful thought experiment
encapsulated as follows:
.Suppose
we have two stones, the first
(Stone-1) being heavier than the
second (Stone-2). According to
Aristotle, as we drop the two
stones, the Stone-1 by being
heavier than Stone-2, will fall
more rapidly.
.Now,
if the two stones are tied
together (say, by a rope), argues
Galileo, then the combined
object
(COMBO)should
fall faster (by Aristotle) than
Stone-1 because it is
heavier.
.Yet,
on the other hand, the Stone-2 by
being lighter than Stone-1, will
fall slower (also by Aristotle)
than Stone-1 creating thus a drag
(like a parachute, if you will)
slowing down the
COMBO.
So, for the created
COMBO,we
reached two oposite contradictory
outcomes.
.The
naked absurdity of Aristotle's
proposition is now in full view,
for anyone to see.
Proof
2:
Let's
assume that we have three (3)
identical balls of exactly the same
mass and let drop them from say, a
leaning tower. They, of course, will
reach the ground at the same
time.
.Now,
let us repeat that experiment tying
together two of the balls before
dropping them again from the same
place. The combined object
(COMBO) of the two tied balls
will, of course, be twice as heavy
than the third loose ball.
.Now,
if we subscribe to the Aristotle
doctrine, then the created
COMBOwith the two tied balls will
fall faster. But that is an
absurdity, as it implies that the
tied balls fall faster than the ones
that are not tied.
Remark:
From this rather simple
proof, it follows the
important recognition that
the components
(or parts, say
atoms) of a material
objects are subject to the
same rate of gravitational
acceleration as the
whole
object.
QED.
Addendum: .With
the advent of Newton's
theory of universal
gravitation, his celebrated
formula is:
F=GmM/R2
that can be written
as
F=m(GM/R2),
where
M
is Earth's mass, m is
the mass of an object, R is
the altitude of that object
from Earth's surface, and
G
is the gravitational
constant.
.Comparing
that formula with Newton's
F=ma,
where
a
is the mass's inertial
acceleration (that now
transforms into the
gravitational
acceleration
g),
we get that
a=(GM/R2)=g.
.Thus,
the
gravitational
acceleration
g=a
is
the same regardless of the
value of the object's mass
m, (as
g,
in the formula above, is
not a function of
m).
The
First Corollary of
Galileo's
Principle: The
Equivalence
Principle
Newton's
gravitational and
inertial mass are
equivalent.
Because
Newton's
gravitational
acceleration
(g)
and his
inertial
acceleration
(a)
are the same, the
equivalence
between Newton's
gravitational
mass and his
inertial
mass is a
straightforward
consequence.
.
On
the Fine
Tuning of
Galileo's
Free Fall
Gravitational
Theory
So far, we have recognized
that
Galileo's
Free Fall Gravitational Theory
must
exist because the logic of our
cultivated Mind will dictate
so. Now, we want to go one
step further in examining that
free fall.
The
Earth, by being a spinning
entity, will have its
gravitational field the under
the influence of the
Coriolis
effect
that will generate a minute
transversal deflection that is
not function of the distance
from Earth's surface. And that
minute
Coriolis
transversal field deflection
is being now recognized
in
The
Galileo-Coriolis
Principle (GACOP)
Applied to
Earth's Gravity
The
Coriolis
effect
resulted
from the
Earth's
spin, will
induce its
free-falling
objects to
fall in a
slightly
deflected
path.
.
Remark: Spin,
as the
primal
tool of creation
(PRITOC),
is characteristic to all
objects at both, cosmic and
atomic, hierarchical levels.
The energy fields, the
ergofields
(erFs),
associated with those objects
are all "subjugated" to the
influence of the
Coriolis
effect.
And those
ergofields
could be not only
gravitational, but also
caloric in nature.
As
such,
a particular interest will
constitutes the case when we
study the
Coriolis
effect
of two massive spinning
objects that emanate caloric
fields, such as the
interaction of two stars. And
an equally interesting case is
at the nano/atomic level,
where the study involves the
interaction between two
pulsagons
(PUGs).
As related to the spinning
Earth,
particular interest of the
role of the
Coriolis
effect
is to be found in Meteorology
with the study of rotating
storms (hurricanes, cyclones,
or typhoons).
.
.
<II>
The
other class of PUGs
are the softelons
that were recognized to be the photons
which, because they were endowed from their
birth with ergo-evergy
(erE),
were also called alternatively as
ergolons.
The photons,
because are softelons,
they generate inflow fields (in spite that they
are nullons
i.e., massless)
that parallel the protons
and, as such, are being called in here
gravions to parallel with the
gravons
for the protons.
Remark:
The deflection of Light around
the Sun is now simply explained
from the fact that the Light's
photons
are gravions.
Finally, the corresponding conduit paved by the
masslessgravions
is called gravinet that parallels the
conduit paved protons,
the gravicon.
With
that, we are now encapsulating our findings
in
The
Eleventh
Foundational
Universal Recognition Of
Nature
(11thFURON): Hardtron
(aka
Proton)
is the Unit Generator of Regular
Gravity
and Softelon
(aka Photon)
is
the Unit Generator of Elusive
Gravity
On
the Creation Of the Primal Atom --The
Hydrogen and
Of the Primal Composite Particle --The
Neutron
Continuing with our look at the amazing
pulsagons
(PUGs)
that
were ultimately responsible for the creation of
the plain and the elusuve
matter (elma),
of gravity (plain and elusive) and of the
caloric heat, we note now, in addition, of
another major role that they play in shapping up
Nature. And that additional contribution is
vested in their pivotal role in the creation of
the very first primal atom (PRIMATOM) of
matter
--the Hydrogen (H) as described
below.
Armed
with the pivotal recognition that the
collision
is the primeval
initiator and agent of
creation
(PIAC),
we turn now our attention to
primons
(PRIMs),i.e., to PUGs
and electrons
(ELs)
--the particles that were being formed in an
embryonal spinoverse
(aka, an
embryonal
universe in
the embryonal Nature
--theEmbryna).
To
see if primons
(PRIMs)
can be engaged in collisions with themselves, we
need first to spell out the conditions that need
to exist for particle collisions (PACOLs)
to take place. After that, we need to determine
what kind of collisions need to exist in order
to produce stable new formations. So, as you can
see, we have a full plate in front of
us!
Recognizing
that not all particles and types of motion could
result in collisions, we start therefore with
introducing some primal parameters that will
narrow and limit that field of possibilities to
guarantee in the end the presence of
PACOLs.
As such,
we introduce now the set of preliminary
conducive requirements (PRECORs) that need
to exist for establishing the creation of
PACOLs.
i)
first, the primal condition is that
the particles involved be
permanently stable so that
unlimited time be available for them
to be engaged in
collisins;
ii)
second, that those particles need
not be stationary, but perpetually
be in motion; and
iii)
third, last but not least, that
their motion not be all
unidirectional, but that, some of
them, be able to reverse course and
move backwards, in the exact
opposite direction,
generating, as such, collision
tracks.
Now,
to be able to continue moving forward on our
trutonian path,
we need to establish (aka to prove) that
all PRIMs
subscribe to PRECOR.
Well, as a result of the 10th FURON,this
is in fact a fait accompli. As such,
through the prism of PRECOR,
we now can formulate
The
First Theorem of
Primons
All
primons (i.e., the PUGs and the
electrons) are PRECOR compliant
particles. In the mathematical lingo, this can
be expressed by saying that All primons are equivalent
modulo
PRECOR.
Proof:
The
permanent stability and mobility of
primons (PRIMs) has been established
in the 10th FURON.
Now, with respect to proving their
directional and reversal mobility,
we note this much below:
1.
For pulsagons (PUGs) Initially, PUGs, as noted in
their permanent
mobility (PERMO),
are following a well defined pattern
of an outward accelerated motion,
moving away from the axis of spin
(AOS) of the
spinoflon
(sFL).
.Now,
those PUGs that have not yet
perished (by not reaching the
critical speed of disintegration)
during their accelerated motions,
will be ultimately stopped at the
"frontier" by the encountered
internal basenet
facet of sFL
and hence, will bounce back being
now engaged into a decelerated
inward motion towards the AOS of
sFL.
It is a decelerated motion because
of the continued presence of the
outward centrifugal (CF) force of
the spinning sFL.
2.
For the Electron Since the electron was born in a
spinning
spinoflon
(sFL)
whose
axis of spin (AOS) is outside of the
electron's inerior, its outward
accelerated mobilty, away from
sFL's
AOS,
is derived from
GUTOM
(point-2).
.Now,
as in the case of PUGs, if the
electron in its outward accelerated
motion has not yet reached the
critical speed of disintegration,
then by reaching the internal
basenet
facet of the
spinoflon
(sFL),
the electron will bounce back and
begin its retrograde decelerated
motion towards the AOS of
sFL.
QED.
Inevitably, by being PRECOR
compliant, some primons
(PRIMs)
will
collide one into another. The question now
is
first,
to discover which type (or types)
of PRIMs, upon collisions, are
more relevant for resulting in the
formation of stable combined
aggregate, and then,
second,
to determine which type (or
types) of collisions for those
PRIMs are best suited for that
endevour.
Well, because of their outflux flash moments,
the PUGs colliding with themselves are being
ruled out as they cannot end up generating a
stable creation. Also, the collisions between
electrons are being ruled out as well, because
of the existence of their xenobase buffer zone
(XB-BUZO)
that will prohibit them to be in close contact.
As such, the only remaining encounters that can
result in generating stable combinations, are
the collisions between the PUGs and the
electrons as detailed below.
Hardtrons,
aka the protons,
have the distinction that their charge is
opposite, but exactly equal, to that of the
electron,
as both respective charges (the proton's
SAT-COV
and the electron's XB-BUZO)
contain the same amount of
xenosubstance
(XS).
As such, a collision between those two
masstrons
is promising as their combined charges creates a
platform of neutral stability. Now, following on
that line of inquiry, we need first to establish
what kind or type of collisions would be
necessary for that end to produce a new stable
creation.
Well,
from all types of collisions, we note that the
collisions at angle (ANGUs),
by being by far the most numerous, have the
additional distinction that they will produce a
spin
--the primal tool of creation (PRITOC).
Now, since the proton is much more massive than
the electron, the outcome of such a collision
between a proton and an electron is dependent on
the collision's speed of entry as both the
proton and the electron are moving particles as
recognized in the 10th FURON.
As such,
Sir
James
Chadwick
Neutron's
symbol ("=")
=
1) For a low speed of
collision entry, the electron will be
sucked in by the proton's inflow field
(infield).
The electron's XB-BUZOwill
loose its identity transforming itself
into an ergo-cover, called
ergonet, that envelopes both the
stripped naked electron (nakel)
and the naked proton
(nakep).
That ergonet
recalibration,
called ergocalibration (ERCA),
envelops now a newly created formation
of the nkaed proton and electron
that were stripped of their respective
charges. The
ERCA
consists in calibrating itself until
the ergolib
(erLib)
of newly created formation reaches the
ergolib
of its environment.
On
the Neutron's Formation and
Stability
That newly ergo-calibrated unit,
denoted with the equal sign ("="), is
indeed the today's named neutron
(NT) that was discovered in 1932 by
Sir James Chadwick.
.
A "free" neutron,
once formed, cannot stay too long
stable before is breaking-up. And that
break-up occurs because of the
DownLevel
(Downlev)
law of the environmental
ERGOLEV.
The stability of the
neutron
can only be sustained in the interior
of an atomic nucleus, called
nucletron or simply NUC.
And that is because there, in the
NUC,
its ergolib
(erLib)
is below the
ergobase
(erB)
being thus below the reach of
Downlev
that acts only in the
ergosea
(erS)
and thus only above the
xenobase
(XB)
line as noted herein.
Clarification
on the Neutron
Model
In
our model, the
neutron
(NT)is the alliance between an
electron
and a
proton,
stripped of their charges,
that have been united under an
ergonet
that is controlled by
ERCA.
This
model of ours is very similar
to, and yet quite different
from, the Heisenbergproton-electron model
that considered proton and
electron, in their "blind"
union, able to preserve their
respective identities
notwithstanding the fact that
such a "blind" union or
alliance was prohibited by the
uncertainty principle
of Quantum Mechanics that, in
the end, was accepted to be a
fundamental atomic law of
Nature
[sic!].
Here,
in our theory, the proton and
the electron in the neutron,
have lost their respective
identities since they have
been stripped by their
charges.
In
Heisenberg's lingo, we have
"loose" electrons
surrounding the atom's nucleus
and have "nuclear" or
"bound" electrons (with
protons) in the interior of
the neutron.
In our
theory,
as stated, in their union in
the neutron, the charge of the
electron, as the one of the
proton, does not exist
anymore. We can talk, as such,
of the naked electron
(nakel)
and proton (nakep)
forming the
neutron.
2)
For a high speed of collision entry,
the electron will preserve its identity
and it will orbit around the proton
generating the Hydrogen Atom
(abbreviated as Hydrotom).
Now, in this case, because the proton
at regular intervals of time will emit
an ergon,
the electron's orbit will have a
Zig-Zag
wave-like pattern.
Electron's
Zig-Zag wave-like
clouded orbit,
its
clobit.
The
Hydrogen Atom,
the Hydrotom
as
viewed under
magnification
through a special
"photoionization
microscope"
described in the
"Physical
Review
Letters" (week ending
24 May 2013; PRL
110,
213001).
Because
of the electron's XB-BUZO,
its Zig-Zag
wave-like orbit is said to be
clouded. We can talk thus about the
electron's clouded orbit called
clobit.
Finally, continuing still with our look at
pulsagons
(PUGs)in general, and at the
protons
(PRs)
in particular, we offer now a glimpse into
the
Star
Formation
At
the nano-scale, the proton's inner
contribution is indeed truly spectacular. There,
the proton is able to create in its
influx
phase a
gravitational
field (infield)
and, in its outflux
flash phase,
a caloric field (CAFI).
With
the arrival of Hydrogen
atoms (hydrotoms)
embedded in the environmental xenofluid (eXF) of
a spinning spinoflon
(sFL),
the formed Hydrogen clouds (abbreviated
as HydroClouds) will begin to contract as
a result of their internal gravitational
collapse generated by their existing
hydrotoms.
Sir
William
Crookes
Irving
Langmuir
Some of those HydroClouds
will collide one into another generating through
accretion mega-structures, i.e.,
mega-HydroClouds,
that through their internal gravitational
collapse will further increase their density and
temperature.
Hence, there will exist a point when that
temperature will become so high that, by the
Pop-Up
Principle Of Creation (PUPOC),
a new qualitative hot "radiant matter,"
called radma, will emerge, as recognized
first in 1879 by Sir William Crookes, and
called later called as plasma in 1928 by
Irving Langmuir.That new state of
matter created is able to preserve its identity
through its increased inner gravity
created. As such, as a result of the
radma
or plasma's
existence, a new radiant cosmic object
has been created --the embryonal cosmic
star.
As
such, from PUPOC,
a
monumental recognition has shaped up: the
creation of a new qualitative object --the
cosmic star:
The
Twelfth
Foundational
Universal Recognition Of
Nature
(12thFURON): The
Engine of Star Formation as the End
-Result of the
Continuous Cumulative Gravitational
Collapse of
Mega-HydroClouds (Created from Multiple
HydroCloud
Collisions)
Stars
are being created from a continuous
gravitational contraction of massive
mega-HydroCloudsthat
emerged from accretion of various
HydroCloud
collisions.
Remarks:
G.
W. F.
Hegel
1.
We noted that the new radma
or plasma
state of matter emerged as a result of
a continuos gravitational contraction
of mega-HydroClouds
that resulted in their continuous
increase of their density and
temperature.
But
their continuous unidirectional
increase of their two physical
parameters (density and temperature),
and nothing else, is truly remarkable
as is in concert with Georg Wilhelm
Friedrich Hegel's staggering
general metaphysical
pronouncement or Principle of
Creation (POC) encapsulated in his
dialectical principle of transition
from quantity to
quality:
Hegel's
POC"quantity-quality"
Metaphysical Transitional
Principle,
mirrored in Nature, stands in fact at
Nature's foundation of its base-level
platform of Creation. As such,
we now elevate and transcend, from Mind
to Nature, Hegel's POCPrinciple
into
The
Sixteen
Universal
Transcendental
Principle Of TRUTON
(16th UTPOT):
On the Universal
Transitional
Principle Of Creation
(UTPOC)
A
quantitative physical
parameter cannot increase nor
decrease indefinitely without
leading to the creation of a
qualitative change via the
Pop-Up
Principle Of Creation
(PUPOC).
2.
Because stars are the byproduct of
collisions, it follows
The
Thirteenth
Foundational
Universal Recognition Of
Nature(13thFURON): All
Stars are Uneven Spinning
Plasma
Formations.
The
proof of this, springs from
the recognition that a star is
the byproduct of
HydroCloudscollisions
and of uneven
self-gravitational
contractions that will
generate an uneven spin for
the created star's plasma
mass. As such, we come to the
important recognition that
stars are born with a
spin.
With the apparition of stars,
the landscape of Nature has changed forever in a
most dramatic way. Not only that Nature has
acquired visible light and caloric heat, but
also that it has acquired, in its interstellar
space, complex chemical
elements.
The
origin of the complex
chemical
elements
in Nature, as anything else, has had
nothing to do with the speculative and
ludicrous Big-Bang
cosmological theory of Nature whose
start (or the beginning) was purported
to have been of an out-of-the-blue
point of infinite
temperature and mass density that began
somehow to decompress, arguably after
its compressional constrain was no
longer in existence.
(BTW,infinite
parameters do not exist in
Nature as they can be
associated only to the mental
objects (aka, to the
mentalons)
and, as such, they do not
belong in Physics. In the
abstract, but not in the
physical, methodology of
science, their proper place of
residence is not in here but
in
Mathematics.)
The
connection between the activity of a
formed star,
as a spewing "furnace," and the origin of
complex chemical
elements in
Nature is now being cemented into
The
FourteenthFoundational
Universal Recognition Of
Nature
(14thFURON): Stars
as Spewing Furnaces of Complex Chemical
Elements in Nature
More complex formations, leading to complex
chemical elements, were able to be formed out of
various hydrotomcollisions,
but those new encounters in stars are now in a
qualitatively new medium -- the star's
plasma
medium. And that is a totally new and different
scenario contrasted to what we have been using
so far --the xenofluid
medium. Now, we have the
plasma
"radiant" medium of the interior of stars that
is indeed a very different qualitative
environment.
The
current theory explaining the creation
(nucleosynthesis) of chemical elements in
stars is through the nuclear fusion reactions
between its atoms within the star, starting
first with the burning its Hydrogen, then with
its Helium, and continuing progressively with
the burning its higher elements. That existing
theoretical roadmap to be legitimate must have,
at its underlying foundation, the physical
mechanism of creation via causality
--the backbone of TRUTON.
What
the electron atomic structures of those complex
chemical elements actually are, and why their
atomic electron trajectories subscribe to
particular configurations --are questions that
need to have a clear rational answer. Those and
related questions need indeed not be camouflaged
by a nilly-willy speculative mathematical atomic
theory that the current nonsensical hocus-pocus
Quantum
Mechanics
provides. Mathematical
theories,
by themselves,
cannot be let to stand alone without any Physics
or justification underneath them, as they will
remain, at best, just that: willy-nilly
mathematical theories and nothing
else!
The
postulated electron configuration of the
so-called shell "orbitals" model of
Quantum Mechanics is in fact a preeminent
example of a convoluted speculative unfounded
physical theory of Nature whose results are
being derived from some advanced mumbo-jumbo
mathematics to look very scientific.
Erwin
Schrödinger, one of the founder of
Quantum
Mechanics,
reflecting on his mathematical work and on the
absurd implications that his mathematical
quantum theory (maquat) has reached, is
quoted to have said:
"I
don't like it, and I am sorry I ever
had anything to do with it."
Schrödinger's
cat that could be dead and alive at the
same time [sic!] ...
and being in two (2) boxes at once
[sic!]
Max
Planck
A
sort of mea culpa comes
also from another Quantum
Mechanics (QM) luminary, the
noted Nobel Laureate in
Physics, Steven
Weinberg,
who in his article "The
Trouble with Quantum
Mechanics" (posted in the
January 19, 2017 issue of "The
New York Review"; pp. 1
and 5, respectively) openly
reveals that:
"Today, despite the great
[experimental]
success of quantum
mechanics, arguments
continue about its meaning,
and its future."
And when faced with the
question:
"What then must be done
about the shortcomings of
quantum mechanics?"
we get from him this
answer:
"One reasonable
response is contained in
the legendary advice to
inquiring students: 'Shut
up and calculate!'
[sic!]. There is no
argument about how to use
quantum mechanics, only how
to describe what it means,
so perhaps the problem is
merely one of words"
[sic!].
The
problem of QM is not with the
words, but is with the
reasoning and its fallacious
foundation, for crying out
loud.
Meaningless,
mathematical theories
purporting to describe Nature
have no place in Natural
Sciences. It is indeed, long
overdue burying for good
Quantum
Mechanics,
if Physics is to come out of
its current quagmire.
The current
Quantum
Mechanics,
by being devoid of physical
meaning, stands as a
mathematical ghost-like
phantasmal entity detached
from the physical material
world of Nature. Its burial
place should be on the grounds
of the Murky Zone of
Physics (Muzop).
The birth of its
trutonian
replacement,
the Quantonian
Mechanics
(or Quantonics)
is ready to emerge and take
its rightful place in
Physics.