Spiritual Forums

Home


Donate!


Articles


CHAT!


Shop


 
Welcome to Spiritual Forums!.

We created this community for people from all backgrounds to discuss Spiritual, Paranormal, Metaphysical, Philosophical, Supernatural, and Esoteric subjects. From Astral Projection to Zen, all topics are welcome. We hope you enjoy your visits.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest, which gives you limited access to most discussions and articles. By joining our free community you will be able to post messages, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos, and gain access to our Chat Rooms, Registration is fast, simple, and free, so please, join our community today! !

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, check our FAQs before contacting support. Please read our forum rules, since they are enforced by our volunteer staff. This will help you avoid any infractions and issues.

Go Back   Spiritual Forums > Most Anything > Philosophy & Theory

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 29-11-2020, 05:54 PM
r6r6 r6r6 is offline
Newbie ;)
Master
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 4,171
  r6r6's Avatar
Book1 Proton { Stable } Neutron { not stable }

The surface of a cube is subscribed by 4-fold 6 great circles { tori } of 3-fold tetra{4}hedron. See LINK

Proton is most stable fermionic matter humans know to exist and in Rybonics, defined by the above mentioned very stabilized 6 great circles { tori }.

Two great circles { tori } = one quark and two quarks { 4 great VE circles/tori = a meson { bosonic strong nuclear force } but two quark combinations as found VE are unstable ergo mesons are very unstable and very short lived particles.

So why is the neutron { neutral charge } differrent from the protons 6 great circles { tori }? We might ask similar question regarding neutrality of neutrinoes.

Obviously, in the case of the neutrons ---same set of 6 great circles { tori }----, it is the geometric relationship that makes them not as stable as the proton.

Since each of the 6 tori have a two flat curvature areas, ---that are halfway positions between peak positive and peak negative curvature ergo neutral { flat curvature } --- I wonder if it is way the trajectories { 0--->1--->2--->3 etc --that define each tori--- interact with other in regards to these flat neutral places, that make those 6 very stable and charged { proton } or less stable as neutron { no charge }?

Here is LINK to three kinds of Gaussian curvature



https://groups.io/g/synergeo/attachment/551/0?thumb=1
__________________
"Dare to be naive"... R. B. Fuller

"My education has been of my biggest impediments to my learning"...A. Einstein

"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool."...R Feynman
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 25-12-2020, 05:59 PM
Andy75 Andy75 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2020
Posts: 23
 
Physics creates models to try to represent what it is believed to be the reality for the present knowledge.
Physic models must have mathematic models too to explain why they work.
Nevertheless, all the Physic models have limits. Quantum Physics for example is plenty of paradoxes that came out with experiments.
Of course, more complex is a model and easier is to find paradoxes. I believe Super String model was created intentionally "simple" to avoid paradoxes, but it didn't.
Your question should be directed to those scientists who created that model.
No great scientist will ever claim "this model is the true representation of reality", but rather "this model is the closest representation of reality in according to our present knowledge"
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 25-12-2020, 05:59 PM
Andy75 Andy75 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2020
Posts: 23
 
Physics creates models to try to represent what it is believed to be the reality for the present knowledge.
Physic models must have mathematic models too to explain why they work.
Nevertheless, all the Physic models have limits. Quantum Physics for example is plenty of paradoxes that came out with experiments.
Of course, more complex is a model and easier is to find paradoxes. I believe Super String model was created intentionally "simple" to avoid paradoxes, but it didn't.
Your question should be directed to those scientists who created that model.
No great scientist will ever claim "this model is the true representation of reality", but rather "this model is the closest representation of reality in according to our present knowledge"
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:57 AM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c) Spiritual Forums