1/3? 2/3? What happened to Quantization?

A fascinating insight. I’ve begun the work to search for other stable solutions to the Unitary Twist Field theory. If this theory matches reality, then it is reasonable that it should show other solutions that match other known stable particles. Quarks were the first particles I thought of–and got to thinking about that 1/3 and 2/3 charge. It occurred to me that it is really bizarre that a particle that shows no apparent ability to form stable states with the electron would have precisely this fractional portion of an electron’s charge. There is no known mathematical relation between the electron’s mass and the quark’s mass, they don’t form any composite particle with each other or interact at all except via the electromagnetic field, yet have this odd exact relation in charge. Why? I suddenly realized–how is that going to work anyway if quantization in the unitary twist field is achieved by having a full twist tied down at either end? In the unitary twist field theory, the twist causes the magnetic and charge behavior, but the twist must complete. How do you get 1/3 of a twist in a stable solution for the down quark? Then it hit me–you don’t! You wait three times as long as the twist ring electron to get a complete twist (assuming that the magnetic effect is proportionate to the twist rate). In the case of the 2/3 charge quark (up quark), you wait 1 1/2 times as long.

This is a remarkable clue, because the unitary twist field theory requires that the twist propagates at speed c (either in a line for photons or in a ring or other path). This constrains the stable solution set to search for–if the twist takes 3 times as long, the full twist path (for quantization) must be 3 times as long and the twist frequency must be 1/3 that of the electron. The up quark, with charge 2/3, would have a twist frequency twice that of the down quark, and intriguingly, is already known to have a mass that is twice that of the down quark. Note, though, the most recent studies show that the 2x mass factor is not exact in experimental measurements, so we can’t draw any conclusions from that. The charge is exactly double, though, and that is what I will use.

This could greatly simplify the search for a solution–because stable solutions in the unitary twist field mean that twist paths that have varying force between them are very unlikely to be stable–yet we know that protons/neutrons have both up and down quarks. How could we create a system where the force is constant between three particles–of different masses?!! If the orbit of one of the quarks is half that of the other–and this is only possible if the twist rate of one is half that of the other!

Since there are three quarks in a proton or neutron, this should point to a three way twist solution. I am going to see if this new clue shows the way to understanding quarks within the unitary twist field theory. I’m dubious that I will find it because quarks not only interact via the electromagnetic force, but also the strong force–which vastly complicates the potential solution. Gluons exchange the strong force–and gluons have mass of their own. Nevertheless, I’m going to head down this road and see if any stable solution results from a three way combination of particles with 1x and 2x masses and 2/3 and 1/3 charge.

Agemoz

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: