To answer the question of what is the fine structure constant - you need to answer the question of how all of these ratios are related. Those ratios referenced are all fundamentally related through the interaction of wave energy. Energy conservation is a key component of how our universe operates.
I suggest to not look into plack's constant too much. It's technically just the energy to raise the frequency of light by 1. Light is a standing wave and energy needs to be quantized in a standing wave.
I can't tell if alpha is trivial or profound. The ratio of existence to non-existence, change to eternity? Or just the relation between relations, that any quantifiable informational body would have, modern physics or otherwise.
The fine structure constant is a mathematical constant (derived by Hans de Vries) like PI or E and not a natural constant like the speed of light in vacuum, I think. We only have to figure out the physicality of de Vries' formula.
Agreed. de Vries equation for the fine structure constant is very accurate. But it needs an interpretation to understand its meaning. I'm hoping that others will contribute here with their thoughts on what it means.
Hello! Can i ask where the last equation is from - the one relating the electron mass and radius and Planck mass and length? Did you derive it or is from a published source?
Hi @Alan, as far as I can remember, I derived the last one relating electron mass * radius and the Planck mass * Planck length by plugging in variations of other fundamental constants that I had derived... just playing around to see if I could figure out what the fine structure constant was. That being said, it's pretty easy to find, so it wouldn't surprise me if this relationship exists in literature somewhere.
It is a ratio of how energy and matter racks, packs and stacks. Photon hit a object and combine to emit as heat energy. It is a ratio of how much photons it takes to make IR. Infrared radiation. This type of how much of this to make how much of that seems to abound all over the Universe and physical and energetic world.
Fractal Woman on youube has an additional thing; she found a correlation with the anomalous magnetic moment. I obviously dont know enough, but perhaps there is some strange thing going on - namely as i had a thought about it yesterday - it might be Unruh radiation? Like watched Mike McCullough yesterday and it all cheks out and yesterday had a thought about this so just letting it out.
but after rewatching the video i feel like is more easy to understand than to add Unruh radiation... By how you asked those question it seems you have a clear idea so please tell :)
@@EnergyWaveTheory to be fair i only had a feeling you are somehow connected. mostly by yt algorithms. Still, in hopes to see an explanation soon cause i would love to see. And Mike McCullough on Tim Ventura has 2 particle rotating, EU model has neutrino-antineutrino orbiting each other and the dirac model has this. Where as McCullough introduces Unruh radiation which is the missing link to inertial propulsion. In 2 of his videos he does not mention magnets once but in one experiment he mentions that he rotates the anode up and down and that around half of experiments dont net a result. And earth has a magnetic field so perhaps he cant shield from this and hence the 90 degree magnetic field on cap dielectric causes around 35N/KW force where you can make it more effecient with AC MHD
As it relates to beta decay, I'll guess that the probability of ejecting an electron from a neutron in atomic elements with high Z numbers are because the strong force that holds everything together diminishes at distance (and larger elements have more neutrons/protons in the atomic core). But to understand what I mean about ejecting the electron and probability, you'll probably want to review the EWT explanation of the weak force: energywavetheory.com/forces/weak-force/
@@EnergyWaveTheory Think of exciting atoms with any sort of frequency , either EM or sound waves or cosmic (neutrinos )... I watched your hydrogen atom model dozens of times , interesting. I didn't find the explanation of neutrinos anywhere . These fundamental constants are a result of basic equations as these equations are derived from one another .
@@Blue.star1 I believe neutrinos are the fundamental particle for a couple of reasons: 1) the linearization of particle energies similar to atomic elements, as explained on this page: energywavetheory.com/subatomic-particles/calculations-particles/, and 2) 99%+ of all energy when a supernovae explodes is emitted as neutrinos - energies high enough that all matter breaks down to the fundamental particle.
I agree that this is super intriguing and that there must be an explanation. I like your 1/r3 vs 1/r2 finding.
To answer the question of what is the fine structure constant - you need to answer the question of how all of these ratios are related.
Those ratios referenced are all fundamentally related through the interaction of wave energy.
Energy conservation is a key component of how our universe operates.
Muito interessante!
I suggest to not look into plack's constant too much. It's technically just the energy to raise the frequency of light by 1. Light is a standing wave and energy needs to be quantized in a standing wave.
I can't tell if alpha is trivial or profound. The ratio of existence to non-existence, change to eternity? Or just the relation between relations, that any quantifiable informational body would have, modern physics or otherwise.
The fine structure constant is a mathematical constant (derived by Hans de Vries) like PI or E and not a natural constant like the speed of light in vacuum, I think. We only have to figure out the physicality of de Vries' formula.
Agreed. de Vries equation for the fine structure constant is very accurate. But it needs an interpretation to understand its meaning. I'm hoping that others will contribute here with their thoughts on what it means.
Hello! Can i ask where the last equation is from - the one relating the electron mass and radius and Planck mass and length? Did you derive it or is from a published source?
Hi @Alan, as far as I can remember, I derived the last one relating electron mass * radius and the Planck mass * Planck length by plugging in variations of other fundamental constants that I had derived... just playing around to see if I could figure out what the fine structure constant was. That being said, it's pretty easy to find, so it wouldn't surprise me if this relationship exists in literature somewhere.
It is a ratio of how energy and matter racks, packs and stacks. Photon hit a object and combine to emit as heat energy. It is a ratio of how much photons it takes to make IR. Infrared radiation. This type of how much of this to make how much of that seems to abound all over the Universe and physical and energetic world.
Fractal Woman on youube has an additional thing; she found a correlation with the anomalous magnetic moment.
I obviously dont know enough, but perhaps there is some strange thing going on - namely as i had a thought about it yesterday - it might be Unruh radiation?
Like watched Mike McCullough yesterday and it all cheks out and yesterday had a thought about this so just letting it out.
but after rewatching the video i feel like is more easy to understand than to add Unruh radiation...
By how you asked those question it seems you have a clear idea so please tell :)
(me re)/(mp rp)
Hm.....
I like Fractal Woman! ^.^
Fractal Woman and I have done research together and published a few articles. Fully agree with both of you on her work.
@@EnergyWaveTheory to be fair i only had a feeling you are somehow connected. mostly by yt algorithms.
Still, in hopes to see an explanation soon cause i would love to see.
And Mike McCullough on Tim Ventura has 2 particle rotating, EU model has neutrino-antineutrino orbiting each other and the dirac model has this.
Where as McCullough introduces Unruh radiation which is the missing link to inertial propulsion.
In 2 of his videos he does not mention magnets once but in one experiment he mentions that he rotates the anode up and down and that around half of experiments dont net a result.
And earth has a magnetic field so perhaps he cant shield from this and hence the 90 degree magnetic field on cap dielectric causes around 35N/KW force where you can make it more effecient with AC MHD
Can you guess why there is half life for some elements
As it relates to beta decay, I'll guess that the probability of ejecting an electron from a neutron in atomic elements with high Z numbers are because the strong force that holds everything together diminishes at distance (and larger elements have more neutrons/protons in the atomic core). But to understand what I mean about ejecting the electron and probability, you'll probably want to review the EWT explanation of the weak force: energywavetheory.com/forces/weak-force/
@@EnergyWaveTheory Think of exciting atoms with any sort of frequency , either EM or sound waves or cosmic (neutrinos )... I watched your hydrogen atom model dozens of times , interesting. I didn't find the explanation of neutrinos anywhere . These fundamental constants are a result of basic equations as these equations are derived from one another .
@@Blue.star1 I believe neutrinos are the fundamental particle for a couple of reasons: 1) the linearization of particle energies similar to atomic elements, as explained on this page: energywavetheory.com/subatomic-particles/calculations-particles/, and 2) 99%+ of all energy when a supernovae explodes is emitted as neutrinos - energies high enough that all matter breaks down to the fundamental particle.
Even though I know and working on it not gonna say what it's related 😂😂😂