G-THEORY thesis CH15





  • A SUPERFLUOUS HYPOTHETICAL--------------------------------------- 624





Cosmic rays are thought to consist of higher 'energy' photons or waves (perhaps the highest) that are thought to be formed by 'gamma-gamma particle' or other collisions at high temperatures. The actual cosmic particle (which I don't recognize to be a photon) may emit at a vector angle relative to the 'gamma particle' collision which is determined by their collision angle vector sum. There is a chance that no gravitons would be emitted during this collision. Note: In G-theory, cosmic photons are theorized to be dimensionally shifted (vacuum adjuncted) particles related to protons or positrons, but with changed quantum and or F-D statistics and therefore they have undergone dimensional reconfiguration (vacuum multiplex status modification).

Except for the probability that they are not photons at all; it becomes unclear why the gamma particles would not enter the gravitos in avoidance of each other. There could be a tipping point at which gamma particles contain enough graviton density to appear to be of sufficient size to react to each other in a more nucleon like manner than photons. However they aren't considered to contain a quark lattice or baryon of any description and as such they are more bosonic and maintain the boson vacuum modifying statistical abilities. In other words they each act separately like the photon they appear to be, but in interlocution prior to a looming collision they appear to each other to be bosons by -their vacuum multiplex status- and so they both act accordingly and collide!

It remains possible that cosmic particles may also be formed by racially similar gamma particles being emitted at the same instant on parallel tines and at some time they assimilate with each other, resulting in a cosmic particle traveling on a central parallel tine. These occurrences would seem to be limited to high 'energy' particle emission states during B-ve decay such as those that occur near the surface of the sun. E.g. during solar flare events; (especially including the phenomenon of coronal matter ejection), and (of course) greater cosmo-universal events and processes.

A cosmic particle would arbitrarily appear to be the photon with the greatest graviton Sp of all photons. When cosmic particles collide in a similar manner as described for gamma particles, they may release all their gravitons into the gravitos (which is a lot of quantum 'energy' for two particles to emit). These would be emitted along an almost infinite number of gravitines only to be absorbed on a rate averaged basis by other photons and this would help maintain general GD stability around stars. This phenomenology may help explain solar gravitational anomalies and gravitational pulses (waves) from space.

The cosmic particle is thought to be so graviton massive that when two collide with a hydrogen proton in the upper atmosphere it appears likely that they can instantaneously form into another neutron on that nucleus and so form a tritium isotope*. This may suggest that the cosmic particle is around half the physical size and/or boson constituency of a neutron but unlike a neutron, able to decay instantly to gravitons upon colliding with another cosmic particle, yet it would have no weight (G mass) because it is not affected by incoming graviton effects because of dimensional separation. Again this suggests that cosmic particles are likely to be bosonic but similar in size (yet dimensionally strange) to a proton.





Apart from electron positron collisions and electron decay via superluminal flares etc. in space, and synchrotron phenomenology on earth, gamma particles are only able to be produced by other local causes of high 'energy' collisions of larger atoms (with delta neutrons by G theory) with combined bosonic matter caused by graviton collisions being enabled by the 'extraordinary' neutrons usually associated with such atoms. Such activity would occur in explosive nuclear events, but it could also occur during lightening strikes and even much smaller and unsuspected events.

Gamma particles like cosmic particles are unlike other light photons (including x-ray) in that regardless of a proton's vacuum multiplex status, the gamma and cosmic particles are able to collide with or exhibit a massive perturbative affect on it during a near miss. This would suggest that gamma and cosmic particles have presence in the photos and have a great affect on the propos** but the affects are not mutual. Note: It remains unclear how graviton drag can (in vector sum addition) lead to graviton transfer from neutron to proton at the nucleon bond junction. This would seem to be better left to the realm of further investigation by quantum physicists, but I think it is perhaps the role of mesons in the nucleons. By quantum G-statistics the bosons just 'change multiplex hats' as required. This is all under the jurisprudence of those tiny quantum machines called nucleons!

*This requires that other particles such as negatrons are involved in the collisions as well and we wouldn't expect to find as much tritium manufacture as there are particle collisions by any statistics.

** The propos may actually be the gravitos. This is not yet clear.


This is all aligned with my previous suggestion that nucleon-synthesis is still likely to be occurring within the cosmo-universe. At the moment the idea is postulative but predicated by the noted production of tritium in the upper atmosphere (ionosphere).

It is envisaged that gamma particles are likely to be responsible for a reasonably significant share of the gravitons that are emitted in the universe and that the graviton density is very great indeed. Gravitons are a valid candidate for replacing the postulated 'dark matter/energy'.

The vibration frequency of some sub atomic particles (E.g. gluons) should be an indicator for the probable frequency of graviton transitions per particle per second. The vibration frequency of a hydrogen nucleus is 1420 MHz, but the actual fundamental particle frequencies are expected to be in the photon region ( most likely x-ray frequency or even higher for some sub particles that exhibit 'spin') and this is thought to be only possibly but negatively subject to quantum chromodynamics (QCD).

This difference could be because the nuclide vibration is formed under conditions that inject elasticity into the system, while the gluon etc. vibrations stems from a fundamental deep inelasticity within a quark lattice and the extreme (but not absolute) inelasticity at the fundamental level of trion biracial force attachment. This is why a gluon spin frequency would be expected to be the prime indicator of graviton transition flux density. (Caveat: Other forces may be involved)

The 'size' of a gamma particle suggests that an electron is about half the bosonic matter density of a neutron, less the bosonic density of the neutron's quark lattice (which doesn't contribute to 'mass') but the electron is also less the bosonic density (of the lattice to nucleon 'proper' mechanically active bosons) which does contribute to the very small electron P mass. This may be hypothetical but it is not at all problematical under G-theory because it explains why an electron HAS ALMOST NO MASS but also why, being a fermion it does have a slight perturbative connection with the photos dimension. This has been examined in more detail elsewhere in the thesis.

Photons of all descriptions can be concluded to exist as singles or multiples of a vibrating packets or streams of graviton quanta. Gamma rays and x-rays are high 'energy' (frequency) particle streams that are able to seriously impact atomic nuclei and lose 'energy' via inelastic Compton scattering. They pass more readily through opaque and dense matter in a variable relationship dependant upon dimensional vacuum modification constraints and protonic vibrational states (temperature) but even so they often have damaging perturbative and collision affects on the atoms in their path. This is similar to the way that some visible light can be seen to pass through your cheeks when you put a torch in your mouth. Particular to our case as living beings; the impacts on nucleons -which cause relative damage to atoms in so doing- consequently causes irreparable damage to cells in our living tissue.

Nucleon attractive force and SBF is subject to all manner of other forces at various temperature states, and under changed conditions protons are not always able to hold on to the neutron. Such an example is the 1H isotope of hydrogen which has no neutron but a single proton. In nature the average behavior of atoms is all that can be said about atomic stability due to uncertainty principle (which doesn't just apply to electron motion relative and positional states). Atoms are however fairly stable until the nucleus contains more than 83 or so protons.

The reason proposed is that the average distance between nucleons becomes so great because (among other things) of a greater number of gaps in the outer nucleon matrix filling layer (TBE). At such distances from the center of the nucleus the strong nuclear force begins to lose its ability by (diluted magnetic (g-factor) and particularly summated gluon SBF force interaction) to retain a strangle hold on the nucleons, so radioactive decay of the nucleus is assured over time*. This eventually creates new less massive atoms. The reason that the 'heavier' elements actually exist at all can mostly be suspected to be only because of the original cosmean forces that were at work during the first instant of the creation.

*Time is involved because there is an Sp statistical requirement to be met. Refer to CHAPTER 18 ---sections--- Specific sub-fermion particle density; and Nuclear fusion and fission.


I do not accept that heavier elements are currently being created in stars, rather (more likely perhaps) in the flares of black holes and it would be more definite possibility in some supernovas. I would however tend towards agreement with some physicists who have calculated that the 'energy' no longer exists in the universe to allow any atomic element above iron 60 to be formed.

In the end it seems that I may have thoroughly elevated G-theory to the level of becoming a tenable theory, which is superlative to what could've been initially thought to be just pure speculation. This goes to show that speculation to hypothesis to theory is a natural progression of ideas if they can demand respect by collating model fitting evidences and by significantly demonstrating a prowess in the area of actually being able to provide plausible and interrelated answers (to the many questions that remain predictably unanswerable by the present theories) and still remain faithful to unambiguous scientific law. But wait there's more!