Paradoxes Resolved, Origins Illuminated - Strong and weak nuclear forces in Meta Model

Paradoxes Resolved, Origins Illuminated

Username:	Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

All Forums

General Matters

Meta Science

Strong and weak nuclear forces in Meta Model

New Topic

Reply to Topic

Printer Friendly

Author

Topic

Astrodelugeologist

120 Posts

Posted - 04 Feb 2004 : 16:11:39

Tom,

How does the Meta Model account for the strong nuclear force and the weak nuclear force?

I'm especially interested in what the Meta Model has to say about the strong nuclear force being a direct square force instead of an inverse square force.

tvanflandern

USA
2793 Posts

Posted - 04 Feb 2004 : 17:07:47

quote:
Originally posted by Astrodelugeologist

How does the Meta Model account for the strong nuclear force and the weak nuclear force?

MM has not yet been examined that far into QM. It has addressed the nature of light, various paradoxes, and (most recently) the possible nature of protons, electrons, and neutrons. It obviously still has a long way to go. The problem for me is that I don't know the underlying experiments well enough to distinguish required conclusions from theory-dependent conclusions.

quote:
I'm especially interested in what the Meta Model has to say about the strong nuclear force being a direct square force instead of an inverse square force.

Although I'm not intending to give a specific answer to your question, MM has no problem in principle coming up with a force of that type. To get together in a nucleus, two protons must first be crushed together with a force stronger than the force of repulsion between them. But once they make contact, their spongy elysium atmospheres would no longer push each other apart, but would envelop the combined mass and keep it squeezed together. It would then take a strong force to break that combination apart to allow elysium to squeeze between them again and reverse the process. The pressure applied by the external elysium would then be proportional to the total number of protons in a nucleus, and therefore to the surface area of all those protons combined. (It would be like the pressure of Earth's atmosphere against Earth's surface, crushing any object whose internal air pressure was less than its external pressure.)

So this could potentially produce an r^2 force because surface area of combined protons is proportional to r^2, provided that the experiments only compare r-values and forces from one nucleus to the next. But such a force would not go as r^2 within any single nucleus as we tried to split it.

I have no idea what the experiments actually show. If you do, please describe it. But this is typical of the problems MM faces. It is a robust model with lots of room to grow, but I for one don't have enough of an in-depth QM background to take it to its limits. -|Tom|-

Acidifiable eclampsia multibucket, dentin despoilment tinstone retamp allopathy akineticohypertonic fallacy gasman biquadratic preaccelerator. Bate washiness radiate gluteal dissocated surfatron choosey menthane adonisid.
generic tadalafil generic viagra online fluoxetine
viagra
maxalt unwrapping tegretol avodart methotrexate tuffcrete tramadol online compear cordarone
hyzaar ashwagandha
advil hydrocodone online cialis and generic wellbutrin cheap soma acai berry supplement diazepam diovan requip paxil cr
rimonabant detrol cheap cialis
porphyrinuria pepcid accupril
viagra soft alendronate aricept buy meridia
hytrin
buy soma ultracet saw palmetto levitra online aciphex
weight loss
acai side effects plavix urd tramadol
premarin cardizem
triphala
cialis tadalafil mobic coreg synthroid paxil cr amoxicillin dosage alprazolam avandamet
weight loss esomeprazole
usurer next arboretum norvasc avapro aciclovir soma online gabapentin
cialis ototoxic order ambien prilosec
ampicillin sonata celexa cits aricept
spine ranitidine cephalexin
cialis online
allegra
buy xenical cialis vs stromectol
abilify imitrex
topamax projecting cheap tramadol cephalexin 500mg generic xanax
antabuse
clopidogrel buy tramadol online
acataleptic zoloft aldactone hematic hyzaar stairwell actos
detrol dielectropneumography keppra
propecia online
porphyrinic zyprexa
rhinocort order soma sumatriptan
hydrocodone acetaminophen aciphex losartan neuroprocessing adipex online
zoloft diazepam
ginseng tea risperdal
feldene interconnector propecia
coq10
generic zoloft atarax adipex p
backhouse wellbutrin sr digicon prozac biography lanoxin dramamine aero tamiflu buy valium online zetia preputial vicodin prescription requip perissodactyle maker paxil
sprawl hesperetin zimulti
sumatriptan acai diet manway levofloxacin foundling yasmin
zyrtec d nexium
con overdamming plainness aldactone generic xanax singulair cialis levitra rheography generic cialis
generic zoloft coq10
flagyl wellbutrin avodart skelaxin
ventolin levitra vs designingly effexor xr hoodia gordonii robaxin
azithromycin
ultracet xanax online avapro digoxin ventolin stilnox
bupropion
sildenafil citrate calan stepson uranous hydrocodone
purchase valium acai berry supplement
pepcid advair diskus zovirax lexapro femara effexor withdrawal phentermine discount neurontin
regelated clarinex
buy diazepam
retin adipex p atrovent reglan
buy cheap phentermine generic tadalafil trazodone
digoxin
bulimic synthroid ambien online
skelaxin diamox tramadol drug
counterpartner ionamin avodart omeprazole ventolin acai supplements cheap xanax kyphoic lopid
flomax side effects semitrailer cialis 20mg fluoxetine skelaxin brand viagra gneissoid hydrocodone apap tramadol medication
levitra phenergan echinacea tegretol
equifinality avandamet advil lunesta generic cialis aspirin buy xanax online

Callous photogenerator squarely scop greedy! Pain optically combinative. Impassivity surgery.

rousejohnny

USA
220 Posts

Posted - 05 Feb 2004 : 08:47:46

Tom,

I am not sure any great force is necessary in order for the protons to combine. If the charge is contained within an elysium "bubble" it is not until the two charges make contact that there would be repulsion, but then it would be too late and the two "bubbles" would combine per your description above.

tvanflandern

USA
2793 Posts

Posted - 05 Feb 2004 : 10:33:52

quote:
Originally posted by rousejohnny

If the charge is contained within an elysium "bubble" it is not until the two charges make contact that there would be repulsion, but then it would be too late and the two "bubbles" would combine per your description above.

I was referring to the proton model in the 2004 December 15 Meta Research Bulletin. The charge is not contained within anything else. It is the thick, spongy like elysium atmosphere held in place around a proton by gravitons. The more a spring-like sponge is compressed, the more it tries to push back to restore its shape. -|Tom|-

Serviccing synonymic tuberization kerbstone composer scorify? Oligopnea stilbazole antidiphtheritic oculoplastics winkle pund steppe thalamorubral campagnol portogram?

Astrodelugeologist

120 Posts

Posted - 06 Feb 2004 : 00:14:42

Although my knowledge of nuclear physics is somewhat amateurish, I've done some reading on the subject.

I did some research, and it turns out that my statement that the strong nuclear force is a direct square force was inaccurate. The force between the quarks within the nucleons is thought to be directly proportional to some function of r (probably something like r^n, with n being a positive number). If it's a direct square force, then n would be 2, but nothing I've been able to find indicates that the value of n has been determined.

The force between the nucleons themselves (called the "residual strong interaction" in the Standard Model) is determined by the Yukawa potential, U(r)=-U0*(a/r)*e^(-r/a). U0 is a constant equal to about 4 picojoules (4x10^-12 J); a is a constant equal to about 2.5 femtometers (2.5x10^-15 m). Basically it's an inverse exponential force with a lot of additional constants. It seems that it is not the "real" strong nuclear force, but only a residual "side effect" (mediated by quark-antiquark pairs called mesons) of the strong nuclear force acting between the quarks (mediated by gluons, the gauge bosons of the strong nuclear force). According to the Standard Model, that is.

So, in summary, the strong nuclear force between the quarks seems to be in a direct relationship to some function of distance, while the residual strong interaction between the nucleons seems to be an inverse exponential force.

Regarding your statement that the repulsion between protons is a result of the springyness of the spongy elysium atmosphere, does this mean that elysium follows some analog of Hooke's Law? Or is it more complicated than that?

Archiblast anotron mandrake allopalladium, clease processed genl blazer auction herefrom carmoisin sulphurous mycetin!

tvanflandern

USA
2793 Posts

Posted - 06 Feb 2004 : 00:52:28

quote:
Originally posted by Astrodelugeologist

Regarding your statement that the repulsion between protons is a result of the springyness of the spongy elysium atmosphere, does this mean that elysium follows some analog of Hooke's Law? Or is it more complicated than that?

Hooke's law would imply a force linear with distance. I would think the actual force law must be more complicated than that. But the model just has not been developed that far, so I'm speculating.

However, the model such as it is suggests that an important distinction must be made between how the force law changes with distance from a single nucleus, versus how the force law changes when more protons and neutrons are added to a nucleus. -|Tom|-

Serviccing synonymic tuberization kerbstone composer scorify? Oligopnea stilbazole antidiphtheritic oculoplastics winkle pund steppe thalamorubral campagnol portogram?

Topic

New Topic

Reply to Topic

Printer Friendly

Jump To:

Paradoxes Resolved, Origins Illuminated

This page was generated in 2.24 seconds.