problems are theory based. The internal structure of the energy sources
are simply not “captured”. Taking into account the finite,
real-physical oriented, phenomenological nature of objects, the "infinities"
The self-evident fact that the distance on a spherical surface does not correspond to the "straight" distance between points A and B requires no abstraction.
This leads to the
The main object of the
body theory is
the elementary body a pulsating hollow sphere. At
maximum expansion the hollow spherical shell-mass is at rest.
equations of motion - based on a sine
function - describe the complete transformation of this shell-mass into
motion energy without rest mass (photon).
Overall the deduced dual system created by the elementary body consists on average of no energy, no mass and no space.
Negative energy values e.g. of the Dirac equation are natural results of the elementary body dynamics.
A consideration of the elementary
body provides an accurate theoretical value
for the proton radius. Elementary body theory based the proton radius is
[ http://www.psi.ch/media/proton-size-puzzle-reinforced ]
[ http://www.psi.ch/media/weiter-raetsel-um-das-proton ]
of electric charge
Electric charge is a secondary term/concept of standard phycics that suggests a "phenomenological entity" that is uncoupled from the mass (and the radius) of the charge carrier.
on elementary-body theory all charge interactions are clearly
traceable to mass-radius couplings. Conveniently, electrical
charges in the elementary-body model occur only as an implicit function
of the Sommerfeld fine-structure constant α as a
(formal) result of the mass-radius coupling.
"Keys" for understanding the formation of matter are the phenomenologically founded charge possibilities. First, the energetically (strong) elementary body charge q0 (which energetically equals m0) and the elementary electric charge e.
f7 was "introduced" to show that the [elementary body] charge q0 is ("only") a scaled mass-radius function.
Wishful thinking and
The Quark Parton Model (QPM), developed by Richard
Feynman in the 1960s, describes nucleons as the composition of basic
point-like components that Feynman partons called. These components
were then identified with the quarks, postulated by Gell-Mann and
Zweig at the same time a few years earlier. According to the
Quark-Parton Model, a deep inelastic scattering event (DIS deep
inelastic scattering) is to be understood as an incoherent
superposition of elastic lepton-particle scattering processes.
A cascade of interaction conjectures, approximations,
corrections, and additional theoretical objects subsequently "refined"
the theoretical nucleon model.
A fundamental (epistemological) problem is immediately
recognizable. All experimental setups, implementations, and
interpretations of deep elastic scattering are extremely theory based.
Fundamental contradictions exist at the theoretical
basis of the Standard Model of particle physics, which, despite better
knowledge, are not corrected. An example:
The nonexistent spin
of quarks and gluons
A landmark, far-reaching wrong decision was made in
The first assumption was, due to the theoretical
specifications of the mid-1960s, that in the image of the SM the
postulated proton spin is composed to 100% of the spin components of
the quarks. This assumption was not confirmed in 1988 in the EMC
experiments. On the contrary, much smaller, even zero-compatible
components were measured (ΔΣ = 0.12 ± 0.17 European Muon Collaboration).
thesis of fermionic spin-1/2 particles was thus refuted. From a
scientific point of view, the "quark idea" would have had to
be experimentally based, argumentatively "buried". With what
justification are quarks "imagined" as spin-1/2-particles?
Also, the second assumption that the gluons contribute
to the proton spin did not yield the desired result. In the third,
current version of the theory, quarks, gluons and their
dynamical-relativistic orbital angular momentum generate the proton
On closer inspection, this second readjustment has the
“advantage” that the result in the context of the lattice gauge theory and constructs, such as "pion clouds",
algorithmically "calculated" can’t be falsified. But even
this purely theoretical based measure obviously does not justify
classification of the quarks as fermions. No matter how constructed
the asymmetrical ensemble of unobservable postulated theoretical
objects and interactions is advertised, the quarks themselves were
never "measured" as spin-1/2 particles.
In sum, the quark masses postulated according to the SM
do not yield the nucleon masses by far. Gluons are massless.
Postulated Up-Quark mass: 2.3 ± 0.7 ± 0.5 MeV / c²
Postulated down-quark mass: 4.8 ± 0.5 ± 0.3 MeV / c²
938,272 0813 (58) MeV / c² Proton mass duu ~ 0,8 -
1,2% (!!!) Quark mass fraction
939,565 4133 (58) MeV / c² neutron mass ddu ~ 1,1 -
1,4% (!!!) Quark mass fraction
Thus, also heavy ions composed of protons and neutrons
(such as lead or gold nuclei) can not be represented by quarks and
gluons. This means that according to the principle of mass-energy
equivalence, nucleons and, ultimately, heavy ions consist almost
entirely of phenomenologically indeterminate binding
energy. Even more complicated is the fact that the ions are
accelerated to almost the speed of light before they collide. This
means that there is also a considerable amount of external energy
added to the binding energy. Neither the theory of relativity neither
the SM does tell us how these phenomenologically can be divided into
translational energy and "mass equivalence."
Protagonists of the SM are so convinced of their belief
that they have obviously lost sight of the essential. Why should a
postulated complex, multi-object-asymmetric, charge-fragmented,
dynamic substructure create a spin value 1/2 and an elementary charge
of exactly 1·e over
dynamic states in the temporal or statistical mean? The comparison
with the SM point-postulated, "leptonic" electron, with spin
value 1/2 and elementary charge 1·e, which are "created" without "dynamic effort"
and structure, identifies the quarks-gluon thesis as a fairy tale.
The "fragmentation of matter" as an »end in itself« of mathematical theories and the inevitable increase of irrelevant knowledge, especially in the form of virtual particles, has become established standard thinking. Instead of simplification, the concepts of formal postulations and "refining theories" obviously do not end in the growth of knowledge but in scientific arbitrariness. Mathematical-based fundamental physics urgently requires a natural-philosophical oriented regulation.
Unfortunately there is no (complete) English translation for the "Elementarkörpertheorie" yet available. "Feel free" to use a common webbrowser translation tool. You'll discover useful information, insights and surprising equations to deduce and calculate physical values based on mass-radius-relations such as... Sommerfeld Fine-structure constant, neutron mass, mass(es) of charged pions, mass and radius of the universe, Planck units, cosmic microwave background temperature, ...
[ Email-contact: Dirk Freyling: email@example.com ]