FUNDAMENTAL FOOTNOTE: sub quantum mechanics.

 

At the lowest fundamental level of particles, matter and energy do become very closely related even though they are still not the same concept. Mass at that level is a very wild animal indeed whereby particles are able to exhibit a wide range of masses with just an identifying statistical peak. Note: except for the Higg's boson.

Because of multidimensional VM shifts particles are able to annihilate and form other particles which can then annihilate and reform particles similar to the first. This is almost like a particle decaying into one of is constituent particles. This is only able to occur when particles are made of the same sub fundamental building blocks and energy values are proportional to matter values while mass is more proportional to the type or value by relationship with fundamental charge, spin and spatial motion. This connection might be vague because quark lattice elicited dimensional configurations affect the masses (and even symmetry) because all of the matter and hence the energy measure used to specify mass in GeV/c2 is not always in a visible or detectable dimension. In this way different particles or parts thereof are even able to exist in the same space-time.

There is nothing relativistic about this at all, its just sub quantum mechanics.

Particles my even decay or annihilate into particles that have either more or less mass than the decaying particle. This is all just an observational and sometimes asymmetric illusion caused by multiplex phenomena. The particles are still able to be identified by their signature masses and behaviors. Any perceived asymmetry will return to the universe in another place so that universal biracial symmetry is conserved.




FUNDAMENTAL FOOTNOTE: electrodynamics

 

Another misconception of physics needs to be cleared up. There is no way that Maxwell or Lorentz could measure the speed of electrical and magnetic fields for Einstein to conclude that they produced emr which traveled at the same speed as light which must therefore be an emr.

Another assumption is that electric fields are made of some sort of charge particles and magnetic fields consist of ditto magnetic particles, or one and not the other, or both differently relative to the reference frame of observation. It's all ludicrous clap trap.

There are no magnetically perturbative electric charge particles that don't have magnetic dipoles. The assumptions of the early physicists are products of their time when magnetic fields were thought to thread through holes in objects.

Surely we've come a long way since then. Surely we should by now understand that magnetic fields don't affect or cause any electrical phenomenon in space including electromagnetic fields. Surely an electric field is not somehow forced by a magnetic field and visa versa. Go on prove it in a vacuum! Surely an electron is not a dimensionless point charge particle.

It seems that just like physicists of yore the modern variety are just as brainwashed by the current traditional thought that they risk being historically patronized if not ridiculed by future scientists. Such subservience to tradition leads to expensive experiments based on flawed assumptions typified by the ones I have just mentioned. Add in another which assumes that gravity bends light and you end up with someone measuring the speed of radio waves from quasars and calling that the speed of gravity.

I'm referring to the experiment carried out to test the speed of gravity which many other proofs demonstrate to be much faster than 'c'. The imaginative experiment was carried out by Sergei Kopeikin, professor of physics and astronomy at the university of Missouri-Columbia USA in 2002.  

When it comes to the phenomenology of electron orbital behaviour we are faced with some serious questions. And perhaps one puzzling supposition.  I'll begin by stating the supposition and move on to the questions. I will attempt to explain the former right at the end because that seems to be the greatest enigma of all. Here it is:  

Fundamental charges are not summative like Columbic charges are.  

The questions---  

How does fundamental charge change to Coulombic charge such that the two don't affect each other?  

That supposition and the question that followed are related: here are some other questions and no doubt you have some of your own:  

How are the standing wave nodal snaps derived?  

It stands to reason that regardless of the size of a nucleus that the Coulombic charge remains neutron 0 ---proton +1 and electron -1. this means that the outer orbitals have a proportionally less Coulombic force charge attraction than the inner orbitals; so the valence electro- positivity/negativity is determinable by variations in the proportionality of the resultant electron charge differential. This is also relatable to the summed eigenstates of the summed vectors of the charges of every electron in other orbitals.

This all works out in practice but how can such a mechanics be autonomous?

It further boggles the mind when you bring into consideration the g-factor gyrations required to keep electrons in orbitals. In large nuclei this requires that individual electrons in their orbital positions are under the control of a specific proton in the nucleus.

How then is this all inter-relatable?

Where is the communication for the necessary control data?

If the nuclei are to act autonomously then the states of the atomic g and form factors which are required to change the electron quantum states are derived from what?

If the motion of particles causes force and energy; then which particles are required to gyrate around in order to cause a g-factor?

What in turn causes that?

What possible mechanism is there that can relate to the whole nucleus?

Answer: Nucleus nucleon-Matrix-shell-filling arrangements and nothing more. This is set in stone for any given isotope. The isotopic variations are due to zero charge neutron population variability and because of that we must assume that neutrons have no viable g-factor as well; otherwise isotopic variations would cause major property changes in elements; which they don't.

This should give us a clue to search for the actual difference between a proton and a neutron because it stands to reason that therein must lie the secret.

At first glance it appears that the alpha neutron has exactly the same magnetic dipole as a proton. However if we look at a beta neutron which has a larger dipole we still might come away with the idea that the magnetic affect is the same. Not so fast. The elements that I assume to be created with beta neutrons are the heavy elements and these elements have vastly different properties than the gases. That's as obvious as the nose in front of your face!

The difference is a couple of extra gluons and an exactly opposite biracial neutrino positioning. The diagram shows that the only difference available between a proton and an alpha neutron would be the neutrino and anti-neutrino positions being reversed.

Such a reversal would have to occur during B-ve decay when the choice is somehow made by a statistical route -not to have the neutrinos trade places- but simply regarding which parts of the beta neutron's dipole become the electron dipole so that the remaining parts in the new proton are then opposite that of any neutron.  If you look at the diagrams you will notice that the possibility is built in. There is no other answer that I can think of and the obvious logic based on such a simple mechanics is not to be denied. Note: Once again everything fits in G-theory. The interrelationships and answers that just 'drop out'of the model are mind blowing!

This then proposes that just the positioning of a couple of biracial trions affects the magnetic g-factor function of nucleons. There must also be a clue resident in that realization as well and that is as follows.

These neutrinos must be dimensionally diverse and separated across a brane which in the proton's case is the magnos and in the case of the neutron and electron---  not. That's all folks!

The only problem with that might be: Even if we become of the realization that the electron shell positions are likely determined by the relatable protons matrix position within the nucleus, we are forced to recognize that the quantum states appear to be under the direct control of the magnos. That control comes from where? Outside of this universe at the lowest fundamental level. So everyone's looking out there for God when all the while they should have been looking down there? How ironic. The almost vanishing smallest space is the most profound. The tiniest 'femptoverse' holds the keys to the almost unimaginably large!?

Mmm: There is another phenomenology related to the cosmea which we can explore: The magnos brane must be vibrating in sympathy with the geometrically eigenvector summed states of all the nucleon positions via the cosmean brane which is -apart from being graviton affected on an averaged similar basis- being retro-affected by electron nodal eigenstate distribution data -via the Q-L and even the Higg's boson- which is dependent on the states they (electrons) are in also. Are they bonded? Is the shell filled? Is the required vacancy in the same shell filled. What quantum states are they all in. This is all QED return data* which directly affects the g-factor eigenstate which is reflected back to the cosmean brane. You could suspect that there is a direct relationship due to an intelligent programme. In any case this also suggests that the g-factor behaviour is also fully dependent on nuclei matrix shell filling arrangements.

*Force fields interact. Action of particles is reflected back.

 

So you might breathe a sigh of relief at the consideration that the atomic behaviour is all built in to act autonomously by feedback data from various sources. OK then--- what or who built it in? What or who caused it to be? What or who programmed it? Did it do that all by itself. Did all this amazingly intricate system arise autonomously? Well I guess that's for you to decide. I know which side of that logic and rationality stands upon. It appears to be God! There can be no other explanation except for magic but then magic simply becomes a god that you LIKE!

Mmmmm! Here's where it gets even weirder than "God did it" if you believe that's weird cop this! Here's where 'energy-conservation-jurisprudent-force' -which we have already noted to be able to derive energy straight out of the vacuum- comes to the rescue. There is now no need for the physical gyrations of particles in the nucleus to create a g factor. The form factor is directly related to the 'electron-nuclei, inter-modulated cosmean-brane vibrations which is again directly relatable to the nuclear matrix positioning of protons and their magnos brane received data. The magnos has a cosmean connection so the g-factor is related to the cosmean vibrational data being transferred to the magnetic dipole via the magnos brane. This is continuous vacuum modification at the fundamental level.

Whey! When we come back down from those lofty heights to look at the humble 1H atom things seem to go awry! Or do they?

That hydrogen isotope being the most simple atomic form only has one proton and one electron. This means that the neutron has no reason for existence so why is it hanging around with protons? Answer. The neutron helps to provide the correct shell filling arrangements for electrons to be able to hold orbitals. If you take away too many neutrons from a nucleus then things start to change in the elemental property states. Note: Refer to chapter 17 where we noted this--- 'The actual eigenspace position with respect to the proton neutron sets can also cause further variation of properties.'

So we see that extra neutrons hanging off the outside of the nucleus don't make a great deal of difference but if you remove them from the inside then the eigenspace/state variations are profound and property change is a foregone. It is possible that a proton will also be removed in synch, so the bound neutrons are absolutely necessary.

So if you add a neutron to a hydrogen atom you end up with the same element with slightly different properties. The differences are now expected to be much greater in complex nuclei and as we saw in the penultimate chapter--- the type of neutron in the nucleus makes a vast difference to properties and characteristics of atoms also.

 


 

 

PRIME FUNDAMENTAL NOTES:

 

Electron orbital behaviour, g and form factor derivation.

 

n think of and the obvious logic based on such a simple mechanics is not to be denied. Note: Once again everything fits in G-theory. The interrelationships and answers that just 'drop out'of the model are mind blowing!

This then proposes that just the positioning of a couple of biracial trions affects the magnetic g-factor function of nucleons. There must also be a clue resident in that realization as well and that is as follows.

These neutrinos must be dimensionally diverse and separated across a brane which in the proton's case is the magnos and in the case of the neutron and electron---  not. That's all folks!

The only problem with that might be: Even if we become of the realization that the electron shell positions are likely determined by the relatable protons matrix position within the nucleus, we are forced to recognize that the quantum states appear to be under the direct control of the magnos. That control comes from where? Outside of this universe at the lowest fundamental level. So everyone's looking out there for God when all the while they should have been looking down there? How ironic. The almost vanishing smallest space is the most profound. The tiniest 'femptoverse' holds the keys to the almost unimaginably large!?

Mmm: There is another phenomenology related to the cosmea which we can explore: The magnos brane must be vibrating in sympathy with the geometrically eigenvector summed states of all the nucleon positions via the cosmean brane which is -apart from being graviton affected on an averaged similar basis- being retro-affected by electron nodal eigenstate distribution data -via the Q-L and even the Higg's boson- which is dependent on the states they (electrons) are in also. Are they bonded? Is the shell filled? Is the required vacancy in the same shell filled. What quantum states are they all in. This is all QED return data* which directly affects the g-factor eigenstate which is reflected back to the cosmean brane. You could suspect that there is a direct relationship due to an intelligent programme. In any case this also suggests that the g-factor behaviour is also fully dependent on nuclei matrix shell filling arrangements.

*Force fields interact. Action of particles is reflected back.

 

So you might breathe a sigh of relief at the consideration that the atomic behaviour is all built in to act autonomously by feedback data from various sources. OK then--- what or who built it in? What or who caused it to be? What or who programmed it? Did it do that all by itself. Did all this amazingly intricate system arise autonomously? Well I guess that's for you to decide. I know which side of that logic and rationality stands upon. It appears to be God! There can be no other explanation except for magic but then magic simply becomes a god that you LIKE!

Mmmmm! Here's where it gets even weirder than "God did it" if you believe that's weird cop this! Here's where 'energy-conservation-jurisprudent-force' -which we have already noted to be able to derive energy straight out of the vacuum- comes to the rescue. There is now no need for the physical gyrations of particles in the nucleus to create a g factor. The form factor is directly related to the 'electron-nuclei, inter-modulated cosmean-brane vibrations which is again directly relatable to the nuclear matrix positioning of protons and their magnos brane received data. The magnos has a cosmean connection so the g-factor is related to the cosmean vibrational data being transferred to the magnetic dipole via the magnos brane. This is continuous vacuum modification at the fundamental level.

Whey! When we come back down from those lofty heights to look at the humble 1H atom things seem to go awry! Or do they?

That hydrogen isotope being the most simple atomic form only has one proton and one electron. This means that the neutron has no reason for existence so why is it hanging around with protons? Answer. The neutron helps to provide the correct shell filling arrangements for electrons to be able to hold orbitals. If you take away too many neutrons from a nucleus then things start to change in the elemental property states. Note: Refer to chapter 17 where we noted this--- 'The actual eigenspace position with respect to the proton neutron sets can also cause further variation of properties.'

So we see that extra neutrons hanging off the outside of the nucleus don't make a great deal of difference but if you remove them from the inside then the eigenspace/state variations are profound and property change is a foregone. It is possible that a proton will also be removed in synch, so the bound neutrons are absolutely necessary.

So if you add a neutron to a hydrogen atom you end up with the same element with slightly different properties. The differences are now expected to be much greater in complex nuclei and as we saw in the penultimate chapter--- the type of neutron in the nucleus makes a vast difference to properties and characteristics of atoms also.

 

Now we come to some excuse making for the following enigma: LOL

Fundamental charges are not summative like Columbic charges are.  

Question: How does fundamental charge change to Coulombic charge such that the two are ineffective of each other?  

 Answer to question first: External charge does affect the atom. If large enough it can ionize and even destroy one! This means that the coulombic charge has terminally affected the fundamental binding charges!

The other proposed enigma isn't a problem at all. The fundamental charges are summative and it's the equal number of electrons in the orbitals that cancels the charge. An ion can have n--- eV Coulombic charges of both signs dependant of the type of ion it is.

The main unspoken problem is with the derivation of fundamental charge in the first place and that of course is via matter anti-matter force difference at the fundamental level of gluons and quarks. Quarks are just an arrangement of gluons which takes a shape which under-girds the formation of a charge being expressed to the environment. This is dimensionally subjugated by vacuum modification and I have diagrams that support this hypothesis. C'mon the charge has to come from somewhere--- you got any better ideas?

There is another problem that nobody seems to even address. I guess that's because they have no answer for it--- and that is: How does the electron leave the neutron and always bring the right component parts with while simultaneously always leaving a proton with the right parts also and only have one antineutrino depart the scene in every case of B-ve decay?

Answer by G-theory: The multiplicity of dimensional forces as vacuum modification acts like a virtual sieve such that only the dimensionally active particles of the required dimension for each fermion are able to pass through. In this way the particles don't collide with each other either. The anti-neutrino leaves the scene because it no longer has any brane attachment.

It must be clearly understood that because of VM the necessity to avoid mentioning the contradictions seen in particle collisions and decays is gone. No notice can be taken of the by products of decays with regard to determining the constituent make up of fundamental particles if they supposedly produce a higher order particle seemingly from nothing such as -including others shown herein- a neutrino colliding with a proton and creating a positron and a neutron and two gamma particles. (Specifically in the Cowan-Reines neutrino experiment ) Note: If you search Wikipedia under neutrino--- the very first photo plate depicts the same experiment showing only a muon and a pi-meson being created with the neutrino and proton being left intact. Pease bear this massive ambiguity in mind when you analyze the following. Just as well this is all over the heads of the public and your paymasters. Also 'ctrl-F'--- JPSI particle.

G-theory proposes that the neutrino*-proton collision simply caused the proton to undergo further -ve decay which created a positron and a few gluon/ W-W VM bosons which upon striking an atom were reconstrued with the new neutrino to form another gamma particle which is also detected The gluons become absorbed into the secondary atoms QL as sea gluons. This fits with the G-theory model and VM shape shifting. Note G-theory concludes the likelihood of neutrinos being Majorana particles but only in the VM sense.

When the false baryon positron-construct meets with the false baryon (negatron) in the electron the two annihilate and the two magnetic dipole arms of the electron are emitted as the two mono-polic gamma particles which G-theory already theorized to be part of an electron.

*It is highly unlikely that the observances are of neutrinos for two reasons. Neutrinos are unlikely to be captured because firstly they can travel vast distances through atomic matter and secondly that it is extremely unlikely for a neutrino to cause any ionization in the cloud chamber as they have no charge and only a weak interaction at the Higg's superstruct. It takes a large quantity of neutrinos entering the Zo boson brane junction to have any small affect on electron orbitals  and just one -even travelling at 'c'-** would certainly not cause them to be dislodged.

** Earlier experiments (circa 1980) -prior to the arguable OPERA collaboration- have shown neutrino speeds to be about 370km/s faster than light. Whether this is anisotropic-ally related to direction is yet to be determined. If this is found to be the case then it can be shown that if light speed had been determined without the use of mirrors, the speed of light in the same direction would be ditto. Refer to Wikipedia--- neutrino.

  Note: Gamma and other particles are noted to be reference frame anisotropic.

 

 

FUNDAMENTAL CONCLUSION

 

It turns out that quarks and the quark lattice are not required to even undergo constant vacuum modifications at all. They are what they are and the VM is occurring at the level of the branes/dimensions where it should be, and it is the force actions through the two notable cosmean dimensional branes that cause the phenomenon of g-factor and form factor. This is all just a natural working out of the cosmean effort to repair itself simply by attempting to rejoin its parts under natural cosmean law, which just so happens to be an extremely time delayed process.

Weird huh? When it comes down to it--- it becomes a choice between weird 1-n and weird 2. The first weird/s violate/s known laws but the second weird upholds them. Which weird should you choose?  

 

 

INFINITY AND WAVE FUNCTION IN THE VACUUM and PHOTON EMISSION STATISTICS

 

Now that I've got your attention; In future I will be referring to wave function as VM multiplex states.

 

 

Multiplex states don't exist in the external space. They only exist where biracial particles exist and are variously bound together on branes at Marjorana junctions.

These states are determined by combinations of the traditional quantum states with extra VM states. The vacuum becomes modified in accordance with entanglement statistics which are produced by variations in atomic nucleus shell filling statistics. This results in the arousal of electron quantum integer states.

The vacuum per se exists outside of atoms but the modified entanglements travel with particles which are roaming free and we observe particles in the vacuum which exhibit modified entanglement statistics. For instances two pions bound by a Higg's Zo boson within a nucleus' nucleon. Will have different dimensional statistics when removed from the atom and that will change further over time leading to more decay/annihilation. This is why particles decay/annihilate because the entanglement is soon lost due to cosmean (really eos) law.

Now because of this we can expect variations in the nuclear space filling parameters to result in protons -in particular- having variable and proportional predictable interactability with various dimensions.

The amazing thing here is: If a proton has no statistical interactability with any given dimension then any particle existing in that dimension or brane will be unable to bond with or collide with a particular portion of that proton's matter content.

For example: The statistical relationship for all nucleons with the gravitos dimension is zero except for the femptospace, where graviton collision statistics rule so gravitons pass through every other particle of matter without any hindrance or perturbation.

None of the dimensions are infinite except for 1/ the cosmea; which is external to all matter except for femptospaces and black holes. 2/ the eos which is external to every nucleons' EWF Higg's superstruct and which operates within a temperature window which is wide enough for most universal activities. It closes out down near zero degrees Kelvin.

The cosmea does little else but facilitate gravity transfer with all deference given to the gravitos and photos including propagation speed. Whereas its cosmic relative the eos is an instantaneous but volatile energy-matter- data transfer dimension. Note: the speed of light and gravity are not constants in a vacuum. They are only constants under the same statistical environmental conditions. The two speeds are co-dependant but generally constant for all intents and purposes except perhaps when determining the age of the universe. We could call them 'steady state' constants.

The eos and cosmea both recognize 'nil spatial size' within their spheres of operation. A speck is as good as a million light years. If the eos needed to it would send some annihilation products from here to Betelgeuse for purposes of parity. However that sort of distance is never required because most particles are available closer to hand. Note: A lone atom will emit BBR because of the eos causing our notice of the third law of thermodynamics in all cases except at just above zero K. What's your explanation?

Entanglement will extend the distance over which the eos will operate. If entanglement of two particles can be kept and the particles separated over any distance; the VM states will remain the same until annihilation eventually occurs ---usually upon striking atomic matter. Because of entanglements, annihilation products do not always turn out the same.

There is some serious disarray and non predictive behaviour going on there. Yes annihilation statistics are generally predictable but with random surprises if the conditions are not kept to be the same. For instance a couple of particles might decay back into the vacuum but the eos will remove those particles to 'somewhere' and return some often unexpected particles of matter back after a fleeting moment of time. Unexpected matter forms they may be but the 'momenta' will always be the same relative to the temperature and other VM states.

The eos fills up all the gaps between every single Marjorana junction. The nothing's perfect law must apply and I'm sure there are some collisions.

In your standard wave-function-symmetry-collapse-space-time artistic drivel theories. Everything is supposed to align with some Laplacian perfection of space time where every photon only exists because of the existence of the collapsing space time at 'c' in the right direction. Or maybe you have another equally metaphysical opinion. No sorry; my theory uses real particles and both they and the 'virtual' obey laws.

Mental brain functions are supposed to occur ditto by utilizing some kind of mental photons I guess.

However when it comes to the human mind in G-theory there is no room for the transmission of mental energy by waves at all. OMG and I thought I had a brainwave! LMAO. However having said that; I can't disallow the capacity for the brain to chemically induce changed VM states -and hence entanglement statistics- over an infinitely large and simultaneously small vacuum of space. Mmmm, might be able to send telepathic messages after all--- or at least pray I guess LOL.

Perhaps the other mental brain functions can be put to good use to answer some of these curly behaviours by wave function/ photon etc phenomena. Mmm.

Those metaphysical mathematical theories are really just an algorithm away from being virtual reality on a computer screen. Oh sorry they already are--- Just check out you-tube. When virtual reality ever becomes reality I'll believe those artistic theories but not until then!

 

 

QUANTUM STATES, ELECTRON QIP LEVELS AND PHOTON EMISSION

 

       A quantum is the minimum quantity of particulate involvement required to emit the lowest order photon and cause an electron to fall one energy level.

The time taken to compose/commit that quantum integer number (QIN) for a low level infra red photon -as indeed for an x-ray photon and in between being almost similar- would likely be one quarter of the wavelength of the frequency of the photon involved. This can be concluded from EM theory.

I consider that the process of electron nodal snaps could be responsible for emitting light but that doesn't fit all the requirements unless it can be shown that BBR other than quantasized light emission is declared not to occur. That seems to be the consensus so it is possible that the photon is emitted by the same nodal snap which forces the electron down levels. In this theory; the photon itself doesn't come out of the electron.

This theory fits with the Raleigh Jeans law and the Planks function but I am attempting to delve deeper to discover what causes the emission of a photon of any given energy rather than awaiting the full build up to a catastrophic electron jump to cause the emission of x-rays as the first law would predicate and how and why x-rays are produced rather than stimulated emission and via versa. And why the Bose Einstein state occurs at low temperatures.

I'm not about to redo the physics of Plank et al because that's all known. The mystery however still surrounds the how and the why.

It does appear that -at temperatures which allow the expectation of normal BBR statistical behaviour- quantum involvement is statistically random but other factors enter the mix from the external environment over various pathways. These will affect the particulate density (frequency) of the photons and or the manner of emission.

There is possibly a clue in stimulated emission statistics but first we will analyse the various pathways by which external effects and particles enter our atomic system.

Assume our atom is not alone so that all pathways may be noted; of which some refer to temperature state changes.

1/external absorption of photons.

2/external absorption of neutrinos/gravitons

3/external perturbation by ditto.

4/internal photons and other BBR as neutrino forward scattering from other atoms/ions.

5/electron motional affects caused by external behaviour such as chemical bonding, collision and electrical motion of electrons in orbitals.

 

First we will analyse 1/

Photons may strike a nucleus but certain requirements must be met for any absorption to occur. Otherwise re-emission will take place. Here is where this theory differs from the standard explanation -which attempts to show reasons for transparency of matter- and in so doing makes no sense at all.

In G-theory the requirements to be met are not energy state window requirements that don't fit any known law or principle, rather g and form factor modal behaviours. All incident photons of various energy depleted states are absorbed as are other particles and neutrinos.

This suggests that the energy level of a photon is not fully associated with its frequency and that is as we have already discovered per Plank. However Planks phenomenon only applies to emission and not to absorption. There is no proof otherwise, so every photon is guaranteed acceptance.

If upon such absorption the existence of the new photon immediately increases the energy particulate state of the atom to a quantum of any level required for an electron jump, the atom will re-emit; and that will be in full accordance with the geometric statistics of the atomic nuclear matrix patterning as well as higher order molecular or crystalline patterning or not. In other words it will emit according to geometric reflection/ refraction or if the quantum state is not met; by lesser order statistics. Lesser order statistics include emission of the photon into the atomic matter neighbourhood as neutrino forward scattering.

Remember that quantum is a defined state only for electron behaviour and it phenomenologically deviates from tracking the 'Raleigh Jeans' law by following the 'quantum Plank energy boson particle filling principle' which is a process relatable to all five of those external affects if re-emission is involved, otherwise absorption is exempt. So in this case the control of the photon energy for re-emission is not from the electrons but from the nucleus. The Nucleus factors under higher order physical statistics control both photon filling and quantum electron behaviour. All internal and externally affected atomic behaviour is moderated by the nucleus.

Now the incoming photon is also being analysed by the same nuclear statistics and in the case of a poor atomic or molecular geometric order it might break down into neutrinos without getting the chance to cause the re emission of a photon at all and the bosonic matter becomes assimilated into the matter which is then declared to be opaque to that particular frequency/energy. Reflection and refraction statistics are dealt with elsewhere. Photons just don't go straight through transparent fluids. It's very possible that just like gravitons photons don't travel at all!!! We can visualise them as doing so if it helps our human minds to get around the problems. Note: Once we get back to that we have an apparent wave-particle duality but that isn't the case at all. Let's please have no wave compression propagation theories either. It's all quantum particle filed theory. I.e. waves are not compressed rather particles are transferred in a quantum propagation effect!!!

 

2/ We will look at neutrinos and other bosonic matter separately from gravitons.

These neutrinos etc, travelling through space are the left overs of destroyed matter and are readily absorbed by atomic matter. If you take any typical individual of the species that doesn't appear to be so, Atomic matter is open to absorbing neutrinos but the chances of that occurring appear to be slim to none for neutrinos; and dependent upon other particle VM and entanglement principles for the others.

In spite of any possible opinion to the contrary; my statement at 2/ regarding absorption of neutrinos is the actual case. It's just that it takes some chance occurrence in atomic matter for that to happen. But it does happen so that can't be ruled out as a significant energy absorption process in atomic matter and it is probably a more significant contributor to BBR than commonly thought because of the stupendous quantity of neutrinos and other particles flying around out there.

The main contributor to bosonic BBR and the cause of the force of gravity as well as the strong binding force are gravitons. The sheer number of gravitons in the vacuum is astoundingly great. Gravitons are not to be thought of as travelling across the universe. They are an extremely dense flux in the vacuum and likely to be stationary, and it is the elastic affects of gravitons that crosses the universe at stupendous speed.

A constant and similar number of gravitons is always present in each nuclear femptospace and this is kept strictly constant and is -by way of that typical mechanical ploy of classical physics- the deriver of the gravitational force etc as per the phenomenology suggested elsewhere herein.

3/ Limited force perturbations can occur from passing external or internal charge particles and objects with fields. Such are able to affect the atomic factors and cause spontaneous photon emission, and -if the field is large and sudden enough- even a catastrophic emission of x-ray photons and worse.

4/ Neutrino forward scattering and photonic absorption from close neighbour atoms is a forgone conclusion which can even result in stimulated emission of photons. That's the clue we will analyse shortly.

5/ We should already understand from the standard model that electron behaviour in orbitals is able to affect the atomic factors and cause emission of photons whether you believe them to be emitted from electrons or not. That is just an assumption which doesn't fit with G-theory or the observed evidences in experimental data. Think about it!

Electrons don't emit photons! Nucleons do under conditional statistics.

 

 

STIMULATED EMISSION OF PHOTONS

 

In some situations the absorption of a photon can cause the re-emission of photons as reflection and in other instances the photonic absorption can cause the re-emission of one photon as well as the emission of a copy cat photon. This is thought by G-man to be an anomaly related to the 'nothings perfect' law by the fine structure phenomenon of certain atoms/molecules and a split sharing of states. In that situation the nuclear modes cause two electrons to get lassoed simultaneously and two photons to be ejected. This of course requires the required statistical states in the shells etc for this to occur.

Apart from anything else this stimulated emission is strong stand alone support for the G-theory contention that light doesn't reflect; it re-emits at URF 'c' ---or the constant speed of light with respect to the stationary graviton flux which is the preferred frame for reference of motion.

The extra energy for this has to come from somewhere and if the environment or electrical current isn't able to supply it then it must come from the femtospace boson repository and in some cases such lased/ing material may lose temperature. I.e. lasers are able to take some atoms down to almost zero degrees Kelvin. Note: Not all lasing occurs like this. Some likely involves internal neutrino forward scattering in material with the required geometry and characteristics.

 

 

THE NODAL SNAP

 

Light emission is proportional to the affects of the external atomic environment on the emitting atom. Nothing occurs in a vacuum. A lone atom sitting in space away from the environment will not emit photons by itself. In fact it has to be asked nicely by another atom! WTF!

The law concerning parity operates over the eos and if the atom is required to meet parity then the signal will be generated within the Higg's brane and the EWF will generate a factor mode gyration -or waveform collaboration- which will in turn cause a nodal snap which will reach out and literally grab an electron and bring it down to the level so determined.

This will also cause the QL to force a quantum number of bosons out of the femtospace at a rate which will determine the frequency. The whole photon quantum is simultaneously ejected from said QL via the Higg's brane and to the URF at 'c'.

That is how every emission of a photon is proposed to occur. This will differ due to variations in requirements for parity statistics and it will also follow variations in the patterning or not of the atomic matter involved.

From this we will notice variations in the light behaviour characteristics of different elemental and molecular fluids (including plasmas). This not only applies to visible but also invisible, at both the upper more catastrophic -high intensity- end and the lower infrared -slow process- end.

 

 

 PHOTON EMISSION STATISTICS

 

Now for the really tough subject: Here we have photons being emitted at particular frequencies of vibration which are NOT totally relatable to the various energy states. I have some doubts regarding the proportionality of quantum state relationships to photon packet filling.

This is an allowable deviation because of the fact that the Plank constant isn't really a constant and it is not the law.

Now I don't expect the deviation to be much but it is required to allow for losses due to the fine structure constant loss and the G-theory spherical space loss constant 'z'. In that case photons with a signature frequency may have more or less energy as the case may be. An incoming photon of any frequency may be almost energy depleted but still maintain it's frequency for aeons of time and right across space. It might not even have enough energy to tickle your eyeballs; yet it is absorbed into an atom and re-emitted at an even lesser energy level yet an electron quantum jump still occurred!? Well they get reflected don't they and if the G-theory reflection mechanics is correct then they must be re-emitted and then they appear to break the other noted requirements.

That seems to be very enigmatic indeed. At first glance; the science doesn't seem to allow that. Don't be too concerned because a little thing like statistical chance comes to the rescue. There are trillions of atoms available but a great many photons are required for this effect to be witnessed and it is as follows: For that to occur, that poor photon has to strike just the right atom in such a state that it gets the required energy (particles) from our almost depleted photon to make up the quantum.

Now you can see why such large telescope mirrors are required to gather light from distant stars*. The lower the energy state the fewer the photons which are able to be assimilated and reemitted. They will all be assimilated but very few will 'reflect'. We also need a great number of them to be striking the atoms in the rods and cones of our eyeballs for us to even see them in some cases.

The travelling photon attenuation statistics is probably linear but the 'reflection' statistics is probably according to inverse square law with distance and the absorption statistics possibly by inverse law. If not we wouldn't be likely to see any stars at all. But that's why the whole sky isn't bright white at night.

*Once again we here have more supporting evidence for G-theory. Mirrors are required to be larger than lenses because of the re-emission statistics losses being described here.

 

 

 

 

HYPOTHETICAL:

 

THE THEORIZED MECHANICS OF THERMAL ENERGY TRANSFER:

 

It might come as a surprise that your morning cup of 'joe' could give us some valuable insight into the phenomenology behind thermal energy transfer towards parity both in space and within atoms albeit with marked differences. This furthermore leads to a possible understanding with regard to the characteristic of photaic media transparency.

It is herein theorized that thermal energy transfer in space (between AMOs) is via photonic BBR and to a conditionally limited degree by the agency of neutrinos. Gravity may be disregarded in this analysis even though it plays an important part in overall energy balance. Refer to CH 6.

Perhaps controversially; I also suggest that even though the intra-atomic transfer of thermal energy is via neutrino forward scattering; such is also under the control of PEP but neutrinos aren't packetized so the time delay required to meet their PEP conditions is vastly reduced so while they still travel at 'c' they are able to carry a vastly greater quantity of energy than photons can from the same QL source. Such conditionality would be thought to be related to matrix and crystalline structure which has an a-priori relationship with electronegativity/positivity which in turn has a fundamental relationship with quark color charge via the nuclear factors.

The thermal energy transfer by photons in space is always PEP controlled.

This means that the neutrinos have an indirect relationship with QCD and the strong and weak interactions are thereby linked.

What's this all got to do with the humble cup of coffee? Answer: As you bring the steaming cup to your lips you are able to feel the heat convection and as it draws closer you can feel the radiant heat. The profundity is to be understood in the next step. The moment the cup touches your lip it burns!

Why? Why was the thermal heat transfer so much greater when atomic matter touched together? They didn't bond by any means yet the transfer between AMOs was vastly increased even when compared to the last femtometer of spatial separation.

To answer this we need to understand that these first two phenomena regarding photonic and neutrino elicited thermal transfer isn't always the case. It is conditional upon something--- but what?

So now we have two questions to answer. ---three actually but the last two are related.

1/ What causes these phenomena?

2/ Why are they conditional? And--- what causes the conditionality?

First we'll consider the photonic production behaviour which is always under quantum packet filling time restrictions* and then it must wait for PEP (electron state conditions). However it must be the crystalline structure -which is related to the fundamental matrix structure and vacuum modification laws- which causes the possibility of eigenvector (shift-realignment) photonic transfer through a transparent AMO rather than light being received and then forwarded by neutrino scattering as in the opaque case.

*Different rates of filling result in smaller photons and the filling rate is transferred to the photon as it's frequency.

 

Secondly with regard to neutrino forward scattering; it is important to note that the existence of electron orbitals seems to be a necessity. However -because of the vast quantity of neutrinos which are emitted by the sun- I would offer a preliminary argument to that point, and I would strongly doubt the existence of electron orbitals in that situation. But even though the sun might be considered to consist of cations there is a possibility that a rapidly transiting electron population within the sun behaves as a flux providing pseudo orbitals, so the first answer should probably stand.

Some neutrinos are lost to space from the forward scattering process and in the case of Sol -where there is a vast quantity of thermal energy being transferred- there is also a proportionally large quantity of neutrinos being emitted. Many neutrinos are also created by B-ve decay.

Now we will return to the earthbound case: It also seems that in all cases the forward scattering is mostly constricted to the internals of atoms and is as previously indicated; PEP related and thus delayed. The rate of scattering is therefore conditionally restricted by differences in the molecular or atomic electronegativity/positivity resolution. This then would produce a proportional relationship of scattering with elemental and molecular thermal conductivity.

Take particular note that in the first mentioned instance -of light travelling through a transparent AMO- the result is limited scattering, and by the previous reasoning; similarly restricted thermal conduction to Q-Ls.

Neutrinos flavors and behaviors (they must have some flavor related mass because their motion causes a transfer of energy) are purely relatable to sub quantum color charge and own-flavor statistics which while having no direct relationship with fundamental as well as coulombic charges must have an indirect relationship by quantum modifications in the quark lattice. A photon can deposit neutrinos directly into the quark lattice and these parity disruptive particles are then transferred by (electron-bond-statistics-restricted) VM facilitated forward scattering.

The G-theory analysis of transfer of energy particles by 'VM shape'-shift-registering would strongly suggest that neutrinos are not created from W boson biracial collision. The neutrinos are simply passed into and through the bosons by means relatable to VM, quantum laws and the various statistics. Because they are weakly interactive they are able to be attracted and captured by the nearest EWF structure.

This brings us to the unrecognized force which causes the observance of the law of entropy. That is the force which causes energy to be transferred from a higher energy level to a lower in search of parity. Without a force there can be no actions such as those which we observe.

The force must be the weak force which must interact by eigenvector law with electrons as well as the neutrinos. They are not attracted to electrons but it is the state of the temperature related difference in electron orbitals which determines which direction the neutrino scattering will be in. That is all from an observers point of view and the neutrino behaviour is simply governed by the eigenvectors of the weak interactions between themselves and the weak force junction.

 The electromagnetic field is related to the weak force  -being  at a strength of 1/s (s is the fine constant)- which is the parallel inter- connection between neutrino weak force and EM caused electron orbital behaviour. That is of course the EWF junction.

Just as emitted light travels in the dimension of the photos, neutrinos -outside atomic matter- travel within the eos* and the two achieve and maintain entanglement.** The original state is maintained for short periods of time. This is probably the reason why neutrinos are able to travel vast distances through solid objects until the 'nothings perfect' law comes into effect and they become captured by a Higg's EWF superstruct. That NP law was actually just the neutrino VM shape shifting (oscillating) to another flavor which then allowed absorption into matter.

*This; and also the last sentence corresponds with the 'matter effect' in standard quantum physics.

**This is why the apparent decay from 'say' a muon takes a little time. It's not decay at all, rather transformation--- which is already an accepted phenomenon of particle physics but currently without cause.

 

It is therefore theorized that the amount of neutrino scattering is proportional to temperature* and because such scattering process has a mutual affect on electron orbitals, it also affects their bonds and we possess the observable data to show that bonds can become weakened and even broken. At some stage the lower orbitals will even completely disconnect from the nuclei and ionization will occur.

In astrophysics we should notice that neutrino scattering from stars is also proportional to temperature and that the internal energy transfer from stars is herein theorized to be via neutrino scattering, whilst light is a surface and photo/corona-sphere phenomenon. This is not to mention that phenomena such as nuclear fission also create more neutrinos.

*This predicts that there will be a disconnect between energy and temperature at some stage along the temperature scale because light emissions will become limited due to increased neutrino BBR emissions. This could occur just above zero degrees Kelvin.

 

 

CONCLUSION:

 

A cup of hot coffee causes some media to be transparent. J   

Really; in G-theory the neutrino scattering is responsible for photaic transparency in media rather than similar to it, and the neutrino forward scattering is a VM phenomenon.

 

 

FUNDAMENTAL CONCLUSION:

 

Neutrinos are the fundamental matter anti-matter building blocks of the whole universe and they are responsible for energy parity and gravitational parity. What massive achievers they turn out to be!