Build An Electric Skateboard - BuildESK8.com
Theory of Everything - Standard Model 2.0 - Printable Version

+- Build An Electric Skateboard - BuildESK8.com (http://BuildElectricBoards.com)
+-- Forum: BuildESK8.com | DIY Electric Skateboard Builders Discussion Forum (http://BuildElectricBoards.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: Off Topic Forum (http://BuildElectricBoards.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Thread: Theory of Everything - Standard Model 2.0 (/showthread.php?tid=150)



Theory of Everything - Standard Model 2.0 - devin - 03-23-2017

[Image: theory-of-everything.jpg]


RE: Theory of Everything - Standard Model 2.0 - devin - 03-30-2017

[Image: theory-of-everything-2.jpg]


RE: Theory of Everything - Standard Model 2.0 - devin - 07-24-2017

Open Letter To Particle Physicists;

Through the course of conducting my own research, I have made some mathematical observations resulting in a theory published 3/23/17 which states that "Down Quarks" are composite particles, composed of a total 7 other particles of 4 types-- (1) up quark, (3) up antiquarks, (1) electron & (2) positrons.

Evidence for this includes the charges of the 7 particles mentioned above adding up to -1/3, like the "Down Quark." Also the odd number of particles (7) means the resulting composite particle would be a spin 1/2 particle, like the "Down Quark."

Also the splitting / decay of a "Down Quark" composed of the 7 mentioned particles to an "Up Quark," as would occur in free neutron decay, would result in the emission of the electron, the up quark, and a 5 particle composite particle composed of 3 "up antiquarks" and 2 "positrons"-- more commonly referred to as a neutrino. The charges of the 3 "up antiquarks" and the 2 "positrons" add up to 0 charge and spin 1/2, like the neutrino.

This theory would also seem to indicate the neutrino is much more massive than commonly believed-- heavier than an electron or up quark, in addition to being a composite particle, rather than fundamental. The larger than expected mass of the neutrino may in fact be an explanation for the composition of dark matter. The theory also implies that there are only 4 truly fundamental particles-- electrons, positrons, up quarks and up antiquarks-- with all other "particles" being composed of combinations of these.

Also part of the theory is that electrons and positrons, rather than annihilating, bind to form a different type of neutrino when they collide, charge 0 spin 0, which remains to interact gravitationally. The same would be true for "annihilation" of up quarks and up antiquarks. These joined particles would only interact gravitationally or through direct collision with other particles, similarly to what is observed with neutrinos.

Another implication of the theory is "ordinary matter" is in fact composed of significant portions of "antimatter" -- possibly explaining the "missing antimatter" in the universe-- ie it's all around us.

I have attached a composite particle diagram, a composite down quark charge description and a link to the publication at the forum for you to review.

Any comments at all about this theory would be most sincerely appreciated.

Sincerely,

Devin MacDonald
SteelHubs.com | TPPSF.com | BuildElectricBoards.com

Composite Particle Diagram:
[/url]http://tppsf.com/theory-of-everything.jpg

Composite Down Quark Charge Description:
http://tppsf.com/theory-of-everything-2.jpg

This is where I published the theory @ Forum BuildElectricBoards.com :
Theory of Everything - Standard Model 2.0 - 3/23/17
http://buildelectricboards.com/showthread.php?tid=150

Semi-related Theory I Published on Ferromagnetism:
Theory of Ferromagnetism
[url=http://buildelectricboards.com/showthread.php?tid=151]http://buildelectricboards.com/showthread.php?tid=151

Down Quark Composite Charge Description:

Down Quark (composite 7 particles)
Components:
Up Antiquark (-2/3)
Up Antiquark (-2/3)
Up Antiquark (-2/3)
Positron (+3/3)
Positron (+3/3)
Electron (-3/3)
Up Quark (+2/3)

(-2/3) + (-2/3) + (-2/3) + (+3/3) + (+3/3) + (-3/3) + (+2/3) = (-1/3)
<-- Down Quark Charge

(7 particles) x (1/2 spin) = (1/2 spin) <--Down Quark Spin

Down Quark
Charge: (-1/3)
Spin: (1/2)


RE: Theory of Everything - Standard Model 2.0 - devin - 10-27-2017

^Hopeful for some useful feedback regarding this theory, I joined physics forums, and I used the above "Open Letter to Particle Physicists" as my very first posting, and then a few hours later, I received this:

[Image: downquark01.jpg]

----------------------------

Still hopeful to at least ask a few questions on the topic, I started a new thread:

[Image: downquark02.jpg]
[Image: downquark03.jpg]
[Image: downquark04.jpg]
[Image: downquark05.jpg]
[Image: downquark06.jpg]
[Image: downquark07.jpg]
[Image: downquark08.jpg]
[Image: downquark09.jpg]
[Image: downquark10.jpg]
[Image: downquark11.jpg]
[Image: downquark12.jpg]
[Image: downquark13.jpg]
[Image: downquark14.jpg]
[Image: downquark15.jpg]
[Image: downquark16.jpg]
[Image: downquark17.jpg]
[Image: downquark18.jpg]

----------------------

Instead of the thread being closed "temporarily" for moderation, it was completely deleted and when I tried to log in again I found the following message:

[Image: downquark19.jpg]


RE: Theory of Everything - Standard Model 2.0 - devin - 11-12-2017

Based on mathematical observations of the numerical values of charges and spins, I theorize there are 2 types of composite down quark & 2 types of composite down antiquark—

down quark:

electron (-3/3)
positron (+3/3)*
positron (+3/3)*
up antiquark (-2/3)*
up antiquark (-2/3)*
up antiquark (-2/3)*
up quark (+2/3)

charge: -1/3
spin: 1/2
particles: 7

*beta decay 5-particle composite neutrino emission in bold -- 0 charge, 1/2 spin

&

down quark:

electron (-3/3)
electron (-3/3)*
electron (-3/3)*
up quark (+2/3)*
up quark (+2/3)*
up quark (+2/3)*
up quark (+2/3)

charge: -1/3
spin: 1/2
particles: 7

*beta decay 5-particle composite neutrino emission in bold -- 0 charge, 1/2 spin

& two types composite down antiquark—

down antiquark:

positron (+3/3)
positron (+3/3)*
positron (+3/3)*
up antiquark (-2/3)*
up antiquark (-2/3)*
up antiquark (-2/3)*
up antiquark (-2/3)

charge: +1/3
spin: 1/2
particles: 7

*beta decay 5-particle composite neutrino emission in bold -- 0 charge, 1/2 spin

&

down antiquark:

positron (+3/3)
electron (-3/3)*
electron (-3/3)*
up quark (+2/3)*
up quark (+2/3)*
up quark (+2/3)*
up antiquark (-2/3)

charge: +1/3
spin: 1/2
particles: 7

*beta decay 5-particle composite neutrino emission in bold -- 0 charge, 1/2 spin


RE: Theory of Everything - Standard Model 2.0 - devin - 11-13-2017

After the experience at PhysicsForums.com (where no "personal theories" are tolerated...) I decided to join a different forum called http://www.thescienceforum.com -- specifically because they have a section called the "Personal Theories & Alternative Ideas" section -- but at first I posted a couple questions in the "physics" section to test the waters....

-----------------------------

[Image: scienceforum01.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum02.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum03.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum04.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum05.jpg]

------------------------------

After several days without a reply to my physics question, I posted my actual theory to the "Personal Theories & Alternative Ideas" section...

-------------------------------

[Image: scienceforum06.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum07.jpg]
--------------------------------
The following was posted to the "Personal Theories & Alternative Ideas" section...
-------------------------------
[Image: scienceforum08.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum09.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum10.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum11.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum12.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum13.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum14.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum15.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum16.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum17.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum18.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum19.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum20.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum21.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum22.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum23.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum24.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum25.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum26.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum27.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum28.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum29.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum30.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum31.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum32.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum33.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum34.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum35.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum36.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum37.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum38.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum39.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum40.jpg]
------------------------
At this point I was banned from the forum for 3 days, and my thread locked, closed, and moved to the "Trash Can" section...
------------------------
[Image: scienceforum45.jpg]

------------------------
After my 3 day ban was finished (yet my thread still locked, closed, and moved to the "Trash Can" section...), I decided to ask a follow up questions with regard to some of the counter-arguments that were presented against my theory...
------------------------
[Image: scienceforum41.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum42.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum43.jpg]
[Image: scienceforum44.jpg]
-----------------------
After several days, still no answers have been presented with regard to the questions put forth....


RE: Theory of Everything - Standard Model 2.0 - devin - 11-30-2017

Suppose that the milky way, the solar system, and the earth each have a co-moving "halo" of dark matter particles surrounding them, rarely interacting with normal matter (possibly consisting of 5 particle and 2 particle composite "neutrinos"). Suppose these dark matter "halos" are "bound" to the milky way, solar system, earth etc due to these dark matter particles traveling at less than than the escape velocity of their respective objects (milky way, solar system, earth). Since dark matter particles don't interact with matter as they "fall" under the influence of gravity, for example, towards the earth, they pass straight through and out the other side, before turning around at a certain point in space determined by their velocity, then falling and passing through the earth again, assuming they initially travel at less than escape velocity.

It is known that as light travels through transparent substances such as glass or water, the light travels at considerably lower speeds than light in a vacuum, as determined by the refractive index of the substance.

Source: http://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/primer/java/speedoflight/

"Light travels at approximately 300,000 kilometers per second in a vacuum, which has a refractive index of 1.0, but it slows down to 225,000 kilometers per second in water (refractive index = 1.3; see Figure 1) and 200,000 kilometers per second in glass (refractive index of 1.5)."

Source: http://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/primer/java/speedoflight/

I theorize the speed of light in a vacuum varies according to the local density of dark matter, much like the speed of light varies in materials with differing refractive indices, such as water or glass.

If the dark matter halos surrounding the earth, solar system and milky way are in fact co-moving with these objects, perhaps it explains the null-result of the Michelson-Morley experiment.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelson–Morley_experiment

In other words I propose simply that the density of co-moving dark matter halos surrounding various local astronomical objects (milky way, solar system, earth, etc) "limits" the speed of light proportionally with dark matter density, such that light travels faster than the locally measured value in areas of the universe with lower dark matter density than the "average local value."

Possible evidence for this includes the "flyby anomaly..."

Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flyby_anomaly

"Possible explanations[edit]
There have been a number of proposed explanations of the flyby anomaly, including:

A dark-matter halo around Earth.
[12]"


Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flyby_anomaly

...and the "Pioneer anomaly..."

Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pioneer_anomaly

"...It is possible that deceleration is caused by gravitational forces from unidentified sources such as the Kuiper belt or dark matter."

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pioneer_anomaly


RE: Theory of Everything - Standard Model 2.0 - devin - 06-15-2018

free neutron decay?

[Image: free-neutron-decay-web.jpg]