The theorem for the mass being replaceable by an area of square meters is most appropriate in ratios lengths. The 4D gravity continuum is treated as a fluid. space is like a liquid. When a proton or electron accelerates, its area hits the fluid, causing an inertial reaction. That is mass being an area that causes inertia in a fluid. The viscosity of the fluid is being researched. It is possible that the same viscosity also accounts for the limited galaxy size and rotation anomaly. Also, the limited observable universe may also be viscosity related, using the same value for viscosity as used for inertial mass.

James asked, "How did you become cognizant that there being an issue

or shortcoming to standard theory? "

In October of 2014, I was asserting that time does not exist. But then

a physicist convinced me that "time is growing".

http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/1932/1/time.pdf

Based on a growing time in a 4 dimensional continuum,

I expected that space is shrinking. That allows

the conservations of continuum. That seemed like gravity,

with space shrinking to bring objects to planets.

The shortcoming of standard physics was its idea of time.

If time is growing out of the Earth, it has a radial direction.

The Gravity Volume Theory was developed to provide articulation

of the directions of time and space, relative to matter.

In General Relativity, hidden away is G. Newton's Universal

Gravitational Constant G is in the Einstein equations. That

means he had no idea what causes G, so he followed Newton's

wisdom without making progress to understand the cause of

gravity. Einstein quoted authority figures Newton and Kepler,

assuming that mass caused gravity, somehow.

To improve gravity theory, I decided to use the volumes inside

protons and neutrons to cause the space outside them to shrink.

I rejected the "stress energy tensor" because it is

inarticulate. Math does not cause gravity. Real things do.

Real geometry was expected to be satisfactory as a tool.

I modeled spacetime as a fluid, maybe a liquid, or maybe a

gas-like compressible fluid. Then I used that idea to

provide the Mass Equals Area Theorem.

If mass=area, then force can be factored into primitive

dimensions, x, y, z, t.

force = mass* acceleration = meter^2 * meter/second^2

f = meter^3 / second^2

But electrical forces can share that definition of force.

Then charge must be an area also, because of the similarity

of Coulomb's force formula and Newton's force formula:

f = kqQ/RR

f = GmM/RR

But I did not want mass= area = charge, so I proposed an

8 dimensional physic:

Gravity continuum : x y z t

Electricity continuum : Ex Ey Ez Ht

January 5, 2017

______________________________

Mass Ratio of Proton::Electron from Factors

The factors that determine the mass ratio of two particles

are proposed. The formula for the Bohr Radius was

combined with the Atomic Scale Relation to deliver

the ratio of proton to electron mass.

mp/me = q^3 r k pi alpha / h^2

That reads, "The mass ratio equals the proton charge cubed times

the proton radius times Coulomb's Constant,

times pi times alpha, the fine structure constant, divided by

Planck's Constant squared."

The charge cubed makes sense, based on the definition

of q in the neo-Maxwell Equations. There, q, the proton

charge, has a formula with the sixth root of a time

constant (tau_e). By taking the third power of q, that

time constant has its exponent go from 1/6 to 1/2. Then

a simple square root of time is easier to imagine as

a geometric object.

The Bohr Radius was already defined in 1916 by (a):

a = (h_bar)^2 / (me q^2 k)

where me is electron mass, k is Coulomb's constant.

The Atomic Scale Relation from 2016 deals with proton mass mp

2.41 Angstroms = mp/(r alpha) = q/(4 pi a)

Substituting (a) from its definition into the

Atomic Scale Relation gives the resulting ratio

mp / me = q^3 r k pi alpha / h^2

Conclusion : only standard universal constants are needed

to give the factors of the mass ratio of 1834. That value

is plus or minus an uncertainty in r, the proton

radius 0.9500000 fm. To get such a simple formula, hidden

calculations of gravity unification were canceled and hidden

from this essay. That cancellation is similar to how complex

numbers get real in a wave function model from old science.

This equation for the mass ratio can be analyzed in

two pieces: numerator and denominator. Let the symbol

~= indicate a relationship.

Numerator

mp ~= q^3 r k pi alpha

The proton mass is related to charge cubed times radius times k.

Units of measure total meter^8 / second^2 for the numerator

because q is area, and k is acceleration

q^3 r k pi alpha = meter^6 * meter * meter/second^2

Denominator

me ~= h^2

electron mass is related to Planck's Constant squared.

h is an angular momentum, meter^4/second

Conclusion: The electron mass is characterized by

Planck's Constant when compared to a proton mass,

which is characterized by charge with its hidden

time constant (tau_e), and by a proton radius

blended with that charge area cubed, and with

the k constant which describes the proton's

active field.

mp/me = q^3 r k pi alpha / h^2 = 1834

The mass ratio hints at the way protons really work differently than electrons.

1/14/2017

James asked, "How did you become cognizant that there being an issue

or shortcoming to standard theory? "

In October of 2014, I was asserting that time does not exist. But then

a physicist convinced me that "time is growing".

http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/1932/1/time.pdf

Based on a growing time in a 4 dimensional continuum,

I expected that space is shrinking. That allows

the conservations of continuum. That seemed like gravity,

with space shrinking to bring objects to planets.

The shortcoming of standard physics was its idea of time.

If time is growing out of the Earth, it has a radial direction.

The Gravity Volume Theory was developed to provide articulation

of the directions of time and space, relative to matter.

In General Relativity, hidden away is G. Newton's Universal

Gravitational Constant G is in the Einstein equations. That

means he had no idea what causes G, so he followed Newton's

wisdom without making progress to understand the cause of

gravity. Einstein quoted authority figures Newton and Kepler,

assuming that mass caused gravity, somehow.

To improve gravity theory, I decided to use the volumes inside

protons and neutrons to cause the space outside them to shrink.

I rejected the "stress energy tensor" because it is

inarticulate. Math does not cause gravity. Real things do.

Real geometry was expected to be satisfactory as a tool.

I modeled spacetime as a fluid, maybe a liquid, or maybe a

gas-like compressible fluid. Then I used that idea to

provide the Mass Equals Area Theorem.

If mass=area, then force can be factored into primitive

dimensions, x, y, z, t.

force = mass* acceleration = meter^2 * meter/second^2

f = meter^3 / second^2

But electrical forces can share that definition of force.

Then charge must be an area also, because of the similarity

of Coulomb's force formula and Newton's force formula:

f = kqQ/RR

f = GmM/RR

But I did not want mass= area = charge, so I proposed an

8 dimensional physic:

Gravity continuum : x y z t

Electricity continuum : Ex Ey Ez Ht

January 5, 2017

______________________________

Mass Ratio of Proton::Electron from Factors

The factors that determine the mass ratio of two particles

are proposed. The formula for the Bohr Radius was

combined with the Atomic Scale Relation to deliver

the ratio of proton to electron mass.

mp/me = q^3 r k pi alpha / h^2

That reads, "The mass ratio equals the proton charge cubed times

the proton radius times Coulomb's Constant,

times pi times alpha, the fine structure constant, divided by

Planck's Constant squared."

The charge cubed makes sense, based on the definition

of q in the neo-Maxwell Equations. There, q, the proton

charge, has a formula with the sixth root of a time

constant (tau_e). By taking the third power of q, that

time constant has its exponent go from 1/6 to 1/2. Then

a simple square root of time is easier to imagine as

a geometric object.

The Bohr Radius was already defined in 1916 by (a):

a = (h_bar)^2 / (me q^2 k)

where me is electron mass, k is Coulomb's constant.

The Atomic Scale Relation from 2016 deals with proton mass mp

2.41 Angstroms = mp/(r alpha) = q/(4 pi a)

Substituting (a) from its definition into the

Atomic Scale Relation gives the resulting ratio

mp / me = q^3 r k pi alpha / h^2

Conclusion : only standard universal constants are needed

to give the factors of the mass ratio of 1834. That value

is plus or minus an uncertainty in r, the proton

radius 0.9500000 fm. To get such a simple formula, hidden

calculations of gravity unification were canceled and hidden

from this essay. That cancellation is similar to how complex

numbers get real in a wave function model from old science.

This equation for the mass ratio can be analyzed in

two pieces: numerator and denominator. Let the symbol

~= indicate a relationship.

Numerator

mp ~= q^3 r k pi alpha

The proton mass is related to charge cubed times radius times k.

Units of measure total meter^8 / second^2 for the numerator

because q is area, and k is acceleration

q^3 r k pi alpha = meter^6 * meter * meter/second^2

Denominator

me ~= h^2

electron mass is related to Planck's Constant squared.

h is an angular momentum, meter^4/second

Conclusion: The electron mass is characterized by

Planck's Constant when compared to a proton mass,

which is characterized by charge with its hidden

time constant (tau_e), and by a proton radius

blended with that charge area cubed, and with

the k constant which describes the proton's

active field.

mp/me = q^3 r k pi alpha / h^2 = 1834

The mass ratio hints at the way protons really work differently than electrons.

1/14/2017

## No comments:

## Post a Comment