Interesting approach, thank you! Last piece of evidence was the most intriguing, but begs for explanation. Earth is about +37% farther away than Venus. That squared is about +88%, which relates to the squared law of sphere surface. Hence, density of neutrinos (assuming they exist) would have to be about +88% larger at Venus. So probability that a neutron will see a neutrino is that much larger on Venus, unless I calculated something wrong. However, the measured lifetime of 15min on Earth is about +15% larger than that of 13min on Venus. So it is not obeying the squared law, which begs some explanation. There is one possible way to explain this by introducing a constant flow of neutrinos from out of solar system. The background neutrino density should be +387% larger than the Solar origin at Earth, because (1.88 + 4.87) / (1 + 4.87) is approx. 1.15. Maybe it is reasonable. Anyway, I don’t believe evidence supports existance of neutrinos, but evidence supports, e.g., vacuum energy, which may be larger closer to the Sun. Why? Because it is an active source of energy, generating additional vacuum fluctuations (= turbulence of aether superfluid). That turbulence then fills and travels in the so called ”vacuum”. Interesting, perhaps the background level could be estimated from the Cosmological constant if that is a measure of intergalactic vacuum fluctuations?
Well... There are a few terms I'm not familiar with, but that's okay. My idea of what all "particles" are made of is standing EGM (electro-gravito-magentic) waves.
I think neutrino's are vibrations in the quantum field with enough energy to 'decrease the space' between an electron and a proton. Ray Fleming has written some excellent books on quantum field effects with good calculations. His latest book 'The Onium Theory' shows some calculations how these quantum field effects can be 'neutrinos' - but the best start is to read 'the zero point universe'.
The neutron decays faster closer to the sun because more neutrinos are passing through a region of space per unit time. Therefore, the neutron is statistically more likely to get hit by a neutrino and decay. We should see the opposite effect near Jupiter and beyond unless there is another source of neutrinos I don't know about. Of course this does not tell us what is inside the neutron but it is a really good clue. Since I am familiar with Jeff's work, I'm pretty sure I know what the answer is, but I will let others try to figure it before I say anything. 🙂
The proton has a magnetic moment, the electron with it's weaker magnetic moment, will align with that, and follow the same precession of the proton. I think the electron is donut shaped and transmits the magnetic moment through the donut hole. The anti-neutrino goes to the outside, almost fits into the donut hole, and disperses the magnetic moment flow, like a ball at the end of a water hose causes spray in radial directions, and thus the assembly becomes neutral/neutron. Meanwhile, inside the proton, something similar must already be happening to disperse it's south/inflow side of it's magnetic moment. Because the anti-neutrino is on the outside, an external neutrino can reach it, annihilate it, and there are more neutrinos near Venus.
neutron consist of intelligent particles , that can't be separated into one type, in a way that only one type can be tested , thus leaving a large amount of equally valid explanation , and some are certainly more valid than things spontaneous popping in and out of existence. The way we solve the puzzle is by using the experiments , not by using a theory made by people who did not an still don't care if their theories have even the most basic logic .
Well, it looks like the neutrinos from the sun have a higher concentration at Venus distance. A higher probability of interacting with the neutron.would it be possible that the energy or frequency of the neutrino match that of the electron positron pair in the neutron. This enables the ejection of the electron with the antinutrino. Well I still have to figure out why the antinutrino, but there must be a question of phase probably related to the positron....
So the high energy proton is 5 quarks with 1 an anti-charge. Higher neutrino density closer to the sun gives higher neutron decay, meaning its causing or at least participating in the decay. The neutron atom is held together with respect to the P+ and e-, by their charges, but its not clear how the neutrino contributes to the atomic stability. If a neutrino whizzes past it disrupts the stability of the neutron....because now there are 2 neutrinos in the local space... so... the neutrino has a part charge that is able to disrupt the stable balance of the neutron, causing it to come undone? But I haven't answered whats in the neutron. Perhaps another possibility is that its just a proton and an electron in the neutron? This idea was apparently popular in the past.
Thank you so much for your thoughts. Our concepts are actually very similar. Proton: energywavetheory.com/subatomic-particles/proton/ and Neutron: energywavetheory.com/subatomic-particles/neutron/
I have an expanded puzzle picture of the galaxy that I'm pretty sure you'll be using. It's fractal, and it looks like it will apply to your model of an atom also. I'll show how an electron is likely formed by a proton. I don't want to speculate farther than that. You guys are guessing about things that you can't see, and you don't have the right overall picture to start with. There are millions of people that, combined, will do a far better job than I can.
Your view of gravity is what mine was about 20 years ago, but you are missing a couple of important aspects. They are what gave me the overall picture. I'm not used to making videos, but I want the views because I have more to say about other things.
Interesting approach, thank you! Last piece of evidence was the most intriguing, but begs for explanation. Earth is about +37% farther away than Venus. That squared is about +88%, which relates to the squared law of sphere surface. Hence, density of neutrinos (assuming they exist) would have to be about +88% larger at Venus. So probability that a neutron will see a neutrino is that much larger on Venus, unless I calculated something wrong. However, the measured lifetime of 15min on Earth is about +15% larger than that of 13min on Venus. So it is not obeying the squared law, which begs some explanation. There is one possible way to explain this by introducing a constant flow of neutrinos from out of solar system. The background neutrino density should be +387% larger than the Solar origin at Earth, because (1.88 + 4.87) / (1 + 4.87) is approx. 1.15. Maybe it is reasonable. Anyway, I don’t believe evidence supports existance of neutrinos, but evidence supports, e.g., vacuum energy, which may be larger closer to the Sun. Why? Because it is an active source of energy, generating additional vacuum fluctuations (= turbulence of aether superfluid). That turbulence then fills and travels in the so called ”vacuum”. Interesting, perhaps the background level could be estimated from the Cosmological constant if that is a measure of intergalactic vacuum fluctuations?
Well... There are a few terms I'm not familiar with, but that's okay. My idea of what all "particles" are made of is standing EGM (electro-gravito-magentic) waves.
I think neutrino's are vibrations in the quantum field with enough energy to 'decrease the space' between an electron and a proton. Ray Fleming has written some excellent books on quantum field effects with good calculations. His latest book 'The Onium Theory' shows some calculations how these quantum field effects can be 'neutrinos' - but the best start is to read 'the zero point universe'.
The neutron decays faster closer to the sun because more neutrinos are passing through a region of space per unit time. Therefore, the neutron is statistically more likely to get hit by a neutrino and decay. We should see the opposite effect near Jupiter and beyond unless there is another source of neutrinos I don't know about. Of course this does not tell us what is inside the neutron but it is a really good clue. Since I am familiar with Jeff's work, I'm pretty sure I know what the answer is, but I will let others try to figure it before I say anything. 🙂
The proton has a magnetic moment, the electron with it's weaker magnetic moment, will align with that, and follow the same precession of the proton. I think the electron is donut shaped and transmits the magnetic moment through the donut hole. The anti-neutrino goes to the outside, almost fits into the donut hole, and disperses the magnetic moment flow, like a ball at the end of a water hose causes spray in radial directions, and thus the assembly becomes neutral/neutron. Meanwhile, inside the proton, something similar must already be happening to disperse it's south/inflow side of it's magnetic moment. Because the anti-neutrino is on the outside, an external neutrino can reach it, annihilate it, and there are more neutrinos near Venus.
I don't know what's going on here but I think that an antineutron has a very long half life
neutron consist of intelligent particles , that can't be separated into one type, in a way that only one type can be tested , thus leaving a large amount of equally valid explanation , and some are certainly more valid than things spontaneous popping in and out of existence.
The way we solve the puzzle is by using the experiments , not by using a theory made by people who did not an still don't care if their theories have even the most basic logic .
Well, it looks like the neutrinos from the sun have a higher concentration at Venus distance. A higher probability of interacting with the neutron.would it be possible that the energy or frequency of the neutrino match that of the electron positron pair in the neutron. This enables the ejection of the electron with the antinutrino. Well I still have to figure out why the antinutrino, but there must be a question of phase probably related to the positron....
So the high energy proton is 5 quarks with 1 an anti-charge. Higher neutrino density closer to the sun gives higher neutron decay, meaning its causing or at least participating in the decay. The neutron atom is held together with respect to the P+ and e-, by their charges, but its not clear how the neutrino contributes to the atomic stability. If a neutrino whizzes past it disrupts the stability of the neutron....because now there are 2 neutrinos in the local space... so... the neutrino has a part charge that is able to disrupt the stable balance of the neutron, causing it to come undone?
But I haven't answered whats in the neutron. Perhaps another possibility is that its just a proton and an electron in the neutron? This idea was apparently popular in the past.
Thank you so much for your thoughts. Our concepts are actually very similar. Proton: energywavetheory.com/subatomic-particles/proton/ and Neutron: energywavetheory.com/subatomic-particles/neutron/
I have an expanded puzzle picture of the galaxy that I'm pretty sure you'll be using. It's fractal, and it looks like it will apply to your model of an atom also. I'll show how an electron is likely formed by a proton. I don't want to speculate farther than that. You guys are guessing about things that you can't see, and you don't have the right overall picture to start with. There are millions of people that, combined, will do a far better job than I can.
Your view of gravity is what mine was about 20 years ago, but you are missing a couple of important aspects. They are what gave me the overall picture. I'm not used to making videos, but I want the views because I have more to say about other things.
I have the answers, But I can't say it here.