It is currently Mon Dec 11, 2017 7:44 pm


Electron to proton mass ratio

Use this forum to ask questions and talk about GPT theory.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

Steven Sesselmann

Site Admin

  • Posts: 99
  • Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2014 9:41 pm
  • Location: Sydney - Australia

Electron to proton mass ratio

PostWed Jul 23, 2014 9:58 pm

The electron to proton mass ratio, also refered to a 'µ' is a dimentionless number in the order μ = mp/me = 1836.15267245(75), there are currently no accepted theories as to where or why this number is what it is.

See WIKI: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton-to-electron_mass_ratio

This problem was the starting point for Ground Potential (GP) theory, and a possible solution was found in four steps as follows:

1) there seem to be roughly the same number of positive and negative charges (electrons and protons)
2) make the assumption that protons and electrons are a particle pair
3) justify the mass difference by assuming an electrically biased observer
4) look for the equation that fits.


It was logical to concider that the relationship might involve a Lorenz transformation, because one of the effects was clearly some kind of "gravitational redshift", but there was no obvious velocity, involved. What eventually solved the problem was to get rid of mass by factoring the numbers by c^2, and by working in eV it was now possible to divide by 1 electron and create a Lorenz transformation factor with pure potential (volts).

gamma_1.png
gamma_1.png (8.82 KiB) Viewed 3330 times


Knowing how a radical function of the type y=sqrt(1-x^2) looks, means we can make further assumptions..

a) that the y value must be positive ie. electron potential is positive
b) that the positive domain of the x value is limited, ie there is a maximum value for potential

radical function.png
Radical function y=sqrt(1-x^2)
radical function.png (16.88 KiB) Viewed 3325 times


As we we are working with protons and electrons it seemed plausible that the potentials of these would form the upper and lower boundary of the radical function, and one of these potentials aught to be a constant, so the proton was arbitrarily chosen as the constant, with ground potential and the electron's potential being the variables.

frame rot small.png
frame rot small.png (38.79 KiB) Viewed 3330 times


We see from the graphic that the electrons potential rises as ground potential falls, and the amount by which the electron potential rises is the radical function of half the fall in ground potential. We now have the full equation.

gammap.png
Potential Gamma Factor
gammap.png (10.46 KiB) Viewed 3330 times


Where ø'e is the electron potential, ø'gnd is ground potential and ø'p is the proton potential. When we insert real numbers into this equation abnd solve for x (ground potential);

wolfram_solution.png
wolfram_solution.png (9.34 KiB) Viewed 3330 times


Copy this into Wolfram Alpha : 0.511=((938-x)/2)*√(1-(x^2/938^2))

http://www.wolframalpha.com

We get a value for ground potential of a staggering 930 million volts, positively biased indeed.

There is reason to believe that this result is accurate, because it corresponds nicely with the potential of Ni62 and Fe56 which are the two isotopes with the highest binding energies (or lowest potential). The interpretation of this observation is that Ni62 and Fe56 can not decay to a lower potential because they are already at ground potential. Furthermore it is a known fact that the planet Earth is substantially made from the elements Iron and Nickel, so to assume a value for ground potential of 930 million volts is not utopia.

Experiment
Apart from those experiments that nature has already provided for us, there are further experiments we can do to test this hypothesis.

1) measure a positive change in the electrons mass over time (10-20 years)
2) measure electron mass at sea level, then measure it again at higher altitude (potential changes by around 3 Volts/meter
3) rig up a laboratory in a faraday cage and electrically bias the laboratory while weighing the electron.


Conclusion
Given the right goodwill, this hypothesis can be proved with a relatively low cost experiment, well within the capabilities of most funded Universities, and if proven to be correct, it has solved the following important long standing problems;

a) the question electron proton mass ratio
b) the question about a changing µ
c) the question about the missing antimatter

PS: I would be very interested to hear from anyone who has the capability and interst in doing one of the experiments.

Steven
Steven Sesselmann
Only a person mad enough to think he can change the world, can actually do it...
Offline

Gerry Nightingale

  • Posts: 26
  • Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2014 2:47 pm

Re: Electron to proton mass ratio

PostTue Aug 19, 2014 4:28 pm

Cheers and Hello to StevenS!

Soooo......if we reduce your posits to layman's terms (or as I think of it, "Logic and Proportion") you basically are

wondering "why does everything match up so nicely w/regard to particle states?" I think I might have an answer for you

that is "logical". Nature does not like anything irrational!

I have yet to find anything that exists and can be observed in the Universe that demonstrates a "state of imbalance"

as a true ongoing process, a "normal course of events". It seems any matter or mass is subject to the mandate of

gravity, and by this posit, it is logical to extrapolate that "gravity is the final arbiter of conditional states of matter

and mass". An excellent example of this would be any of the "fissile" states of matter that "emit" for definable

lengths of time...I believe gravity is serving to dictate that there is an "imbalance" and is forcing the issue

of compliance w/ regard to stability, i.e, gravity is forcing the fissile matter to comply w/Relativity functions, so

that each atom is effectively "balanced" w/respect to the atom and it's neighbors.

......

The above seems to prove the axiom of "greater to lesser" as true fact, as well as "action and reaction".


(Thanks for reading!)
Offline
User avatar

Steven Sesselmann

Site Admin

  • Posts: 99
  • Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2014 9:41 pm
  • Location: Sydney - Australia

Re: Electron to proton mass ratio

PostTue Aug 19, 2014 5:39 pm

Gerry,

As you can see from my previous posts, old school "gravity" does not feature in my theory, it has been replaced by electrical potential, which almost works the same way, but not quite. Moving a mass through an increasing electrical potential actually increases it's mass, gravity has no way of explaining that.

See earlier post viewtopic.php?f=12&t=21&p=41#p41

Steven
Steven Sesselmann
Only a person mad enough to think he can change the world, can actually do it...
Offline

Gerry Nightingale

  • Posts: 26
  • Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2014 2:47 pm

Re: Electron to proton mass ratio

PostThu Aug 21, 2014 12:37 pm

A further reply to Steven S. (this thread)

I am having a very difficult time envisioning a circumstance regarding a "pro-forma" energy state or electromagnetic
field which does NOT have a gravity component...if energy or a "field" exists, then matter or mass is present at some
point, and if matter/mass is present, then gravity is involved.

I know you are familiar w/ high-voltage fields, and the resulting EM "field" that is present when the wire is "charged".
Although for the purpose of physics, it is possible to examine the "field effect" as independent of the physicality of
the wire...gravity is still involved as the "causation" for the molecular and atom structures coherence.

(Thanks for reading!)
Offline
User avatar

Steven Sesselmann

Site Admin

  • Posts: 99
  • Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2014 9:41 pm
  • Location: Sydney - Australia

Re: Electron to proton mass ratio

PostThu Aug 21, 2014 1:46 pm

Gerry Nightingale wrote:A further reply to Steven S. (this thread)

I am having a very difficult time envisioning a circumstance regarding a "pro-forma" energy state or electromagnetic
field which does NOT have a gravity component...

Gerry,

What is gravity?
Steven Sesselmann
Only a person mad enough to think he can change the world, can actually do it...

Return to General discussion - talk physics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron