52016 All sources by conventional methods will be cited when I rewrite this Blog before releasing in Book Form.
10611 I haven't been unable to update this Web Page
because it will not Publish
10611 Called Homestead Technologies 18007972958 selected 1 choice offered got Anthony.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Told him the problem because I haven't received an Email from them yet and he looked up my account but needed my credit card number again. He looked over my account info and said he would Email it to me at cactusjackdoan@gmail.com I have never got this again?He gave my pin no. 26887 and also a new username cactusjackdoan@gmail.com & new password qduroriz4123 which I logged on with at my Intuit Sitebuilder icon on my desk top window after getting Microsoft.com webpage via internet explorer as he advised me to to get their phone number. I tired ti get their phone number but couldn't. He had tryed to assist me on my PC by NTRsupport session code 59ou1177. He then said me to call Microsoft and I asked him for that No. but he said I would have to go to www.microsoft.com and get it which I try but could not get it.
12611 I can auto log on now but not publish?
22611 Changed to INTUIT SiteBuilder Plus.
101711 I support the Ideal of Occupy Wall Street.
Jackbecommspeednet’s Weblog
Continue after New Physical Constancy’s JLD Edit WordPress.com weblog
Copy of SciAm.com Einstine’s Math
September 25, 2007
ASK THE EXPERTS: MATHEMATICS
What is the significance of E = mc2? And what does it mean?
Ronald C. Lasky, director of the Cook Engineering Design Center at Dartmouth College, explains the significance behind this hallowed equation:It is the most famous equation in the world. Many can recite it—and attribute it to Albert Einstein—but few know its significance.It tells us that mass and energy are related, and, in those rare instances where mass is converted totally into energy, how much energy that will be. The elegance with which it ties together three disparate parts of nature—energy, the speed of light and mass—is profound.
Here is where the equation of all equations comes from:
It was known for some time before Einstein’s insights that electromagnetic radiation (light, for example) possessed momentum. This quality of radiation is small in magnitude—after all, you needn’t worry about being knocked over by sunlight—but easily measurable. Applying an understanding of light’s momentum within a little thought experiment, it is possible to see how E = mc2 comes about.
Consider a cubic hollow box at rest in space with sides of length D and a mass of M. This box is also symmetrical in its mass distribution. One of the faces inside the box is coated with a fluorescing material, and, at a given moment, a photon (i.e., a particle of light) is emitted from that material, perpendicular to its surface. The momentum of this photon causes the box to move in the opposite direction as the photon, and it continues to move until the photon hits the opposite wall. During this time the box moves a very small distance, Δx.
Image: RONALD LASKY
Newton’s laws of mechanics tell us that the center of mass cannot move, because the box has not been acted upon by an outside force. However, in order to keep the center of mass constant, since the box has moved, some mass must have been transferred from the fluorescing side of the box to the absorbing side in the process of generating the photon and its striking the opposite side. Therefore the photon must have a mass, m.
So the photon, which also possesses energy E, is emitted from the fluorescing side of the box. Its momentum, Pphoton, is equal to its energy divided by the speed of light: Pphoton = E / c. The photon will impart this momentum to the box, causing the box to move a small distance, Δx, during the time, t, in which the photon travels to the opposite side of the box. The momentum of the box, Pbox, is also equal to its mass, M, times the velocity, vbox, at which it moves before the photon strikes its target. (Note: The box loses the photon’s mass, m, during this process, but this slight loss can be neglected here.) Hence:
Pphoton = Pbox = E / c = MvboxThen vbox = E / cM (1)We can also determine the time it takes for the photon to travel across the box: it is equal to the length, between parallel faces, of the box (which is D), minus the amount the box moved in the opposite direction (Δx), divided by the speed of light, c. (The target will essentially have moved a slight distance closer, meaning the photon did not have to travel the full distance D.):t = (D – Δx) / c
But, since Δx is a minute fraction of D, we essentially get:
t = D / c (2)
Now, since vbox = Δx / t , using equation 2, vbox can be restated as:
vbox = Δxc / D (3)
Substituting equation 3 for the term vbox in equation 1:
Δxc / D = E / cM
Next, we rearrange the terms to get:
ΔxM = ED / c2 (4)
Assuming the center of the box is initially at x = 0, this position is also the center of mass, xm. After the photon event, the box moves Δx to the left, as shown in the figure below, and the equivalent mass of the photon, m, is deposited on the opposite side. As mentioned above, we recall from Newton’s Laws that the center of mass must not change, because the box is not acted upon by an outside force. This concept is expressed in the center of mass equation below. The center of mass is at x = 0 in the left half of the equation and it is still at 0 after the photon strikes the opposite wall as described in the right half of the equation.
xm, initial = xm, final0 = (–MΔx – mΔx + mD) / M
0 = (mD – (M + m)Δx) / MSolving for Δx:
Δx = mD / (M + m)
Since m is extremely small:
Δx = mD / M (5)Substituting equation 5 into equation 4:(mDM) / M = ED / c2The mass of the box and D cancel out, leaving:m = E / c2
Which rearranges to:
E = mc2
Posted by jackbecommspeednet
2nd part of Analogy to THEORY OF EVERYTHING
September 24, 2007
14_________________________
Next from Scientific American July 2000 Page 75 upper right Quote:
"AThe Standard Model
The Standard Model of particle physics encompasses our knowledge of the fundamental particles and how they interact. It contains two kinds of particles of matter and particles that transmit forces. For example, the electromagnetic force between a proton and an electron is generated by photons (Particles of light) being passed back and forth between them. The matter particles come in three families of four, each family differing only by mass. All the matter around us is made of particles
from the lightest family. These are Aup@ quarks, Adown@ quarks, electrons and electronneutrinos. The other two families of matter particles exist only ephemerally after being created in highenergy
collisions (neutrinos, however, are long lived). The quarks are stuck together by the strong force, carried by gluon’s, to form Ahadrons,@ which include the photons and neutrons that combine to make atomic nuclei. Electrons, attracted to these nuclei by the electromagnetic force carried by photons, orbit nuclei to form atoms and molecules. The weak interaction, carried by the W and Z particles, helps to fuel the sun and is responsible when an atomic nucleus decays and emits an electron and a neutrino.
Gravity, the weakest force, is most familiar to us because it acts on mass and we live on a very massive object, the earth. Particles called gravitons are assumed to carry gravity, but they have not
been detected, because the force is so weak. Also, gravitons are not yet properly incorporated into the Standard Model. The entire system of matter and forces (Except gravity) is encapsulated in a few
simple equations derived from a function (The system=s ALagrangian@) that is organized around one core principle (known as local gauge symmetry). Why nature has three families of matter is just one of many questions unanswered by the Standard Model. Considered one of the great intellectual triumphs of 20thcentury science, the Standard Model can only be a steppingstone to a more complete description of nature's forces. BGram P. Collins, staff writer"
Integration of the differentiated descriptions of modern science in the above Standard Model
into Jack L. Doan's Analogies spiral energy string theory and Unified Field Theory will be
accomplished in the following refinement of my Analogies.
7/23/2000 continue Jack L. Doan Analogies
Got the book, paperback, A Complete EducationWithout The Tuition! Instant Physics from Aristotle to Einstein, and beyond by Tony Rothman, Ph. D. Byson Press Book published by Fawcett Columbine – New York
15________________________
From page 101 Ademo 1 More On Forces and Fields!! Make sure you know definitions on force and field strength from the text. You also need the definition of potential energy from Chapter 3.
Physicists designate the gravitational field strength to be defined as g = F/m; it is just the acceleration, g. By analogy the electric field strength is defined as E = F/q. Notice the analogy is not exact. We know by now F = ma, always. That means the electric field is E – F/q = ma/q. The field strength is in not the acceleration, as it is for the gravitational field, but the acceleration multiplied by the ratio $$m/q).@$$
1: $$e = m c^2$$
2: $$d/de (e = m c^2)$$
3: m := 1 10^30 approximate mass of electron
4: c := 0.1 3 10^8 @ c = speed is 1/10 th the speed of light
5: e = 9/10000000000000000 = the energy is 9 times 10^ – 16 ? units
AAlso we defined potential energy (Chapter 3, Equations 2 and 4) as force applied over given distance, PE = Fd. For gravity the force on a mass is, from above, F = mg. For electric field the force on a charge is F = qE. We can then write for the potential energy of the charge
PE = Fd = qEd. (1)
Combination Ed is given a special name: volts; Ed = V.@
My response to page 179 of Quantum Mechanics A(on the other hand, the mass of an electron is only 10^30 kilograms and it may be moving at a tenth the speed of light. In this case LAMBDA db can be large enough to measure (calculate it!).@ First I calculated e see equations 1 thru 5 above my start using program DERIVE in refining my analogies. Next LAMBDA db = h/mv = h/p. (9) From page 165 Quantum Mechanics Elight = h*v. (1)
AH v was the frequency of the light and h was a number. From the experimental data Planck found that the h was about 6.6 * 10^34 joule – seconds. Today h is called Planck=s constant in his honor. Just as important he needed to postulate that the black body Astrings@ could not have any old energy, but had to have discrete energy given by
Estring = nhv Or v = Estring/nh. (2)
The important thing is that the number n must be an integer, 1, 2, 3,… then the bottom form of equation 2 shows that the string (oscillator) with a given energy Estring vibrates at a certain frequency when n = 1, at another when n = 2, etc., but it cannot vibrate at frequencies in between. (2) is contained the original use of the Quantum Principle: certain quantities in nature occur only in discrete intervals; the size of these intervals is determined by Planck's constant, h.@
Therefore: LAMBDA db = h/mv = h/p
LAMBDA db = 6.6*10^34 / 1*10^30 * .1*3*10^30
cycles per second jouleseconds kilograms meters / second
LAMBDA db = 6.6*10^34 / .3*10^60
cycles per second jouleseconds kilograms meter / second
LAMBDA db = 6.6/.3 * 10^26
LAMBDA db = 22*10^26 cycles/second
16_____________________
Continued the above quote ADeBroglie's ideas were confirmed in 1927 when electrons, beamed through crystals, showed wavelike diffraction patterns, just like those in Young's experiment! The idea that particles sometimes behave like waves and visa versa leads to startling results. For example we know from Young's experiment that a beam of light shown on two slits will form a specific diffraction pattern on a distant wall or photographic plate (see chapter 4). This two slit diffraction pattern is conclusive proof that light behaves as a wave and is passing through both slits. If you cover up one slit, you do not get the same pattern.
On the other hand, we have said a beam of light consists of particles called photons. Pretend the beam of light is so dim that one photon at a time is passing by the slits. If photons are particles, surely each passes through one slit or the other. Indeed, if you perform this experiment you will see on the photographic plate little spots where the photons have fallen, conclusive proof of the particle nature of photons. But as the pattern builds up over many photons, you reproduce the 2 slit diffraction pattern, which is proof that the light passes through both slits and is a wave! If you cover up one slit or the other each time a photon passes you won't get the 2 slit pattern! Each photon must somehow sense both slits, like a wave, even though it is recorded on the photographic plate like a particle!@
Now, in continuing my Jack L. Doan analogy refinement, #4 Analogy of spiral String Energy the photon will be further discussed to demonstrate that the above wave particle duality which is the central dilemma of the 20th century and now still unsolved until now with this publication in the 21st century we are starting with the refinement of Jack L. Doan's #4 Analogy of Spiral String Energy
delineation of the photons wave particle duality.
The spiral string of energy of E = mc^2 is the subcomponent of this particle photon that has this energy field the photons part of ether that extends outside of present day science defined radius by many magnitudes.
“180 INSTANT PHYSICS 17_____________________
Posted by jackbecommspeednet
Anologies on THEORY OF EVERYTHING
September 24, 2007
01 Jack L. Doan's Analogies on THEORY OF EVERYTHING Evolution 92407 Fundamental Facets of My Analogy of Religiosity: PAGE 1. Facet of Creation Intelligent Formulator (GOD) , my concept used in the introverted study of creation fundamental facets in the following; Analogy: God (Creation Intelligent Formulator) is mankind's icon in these last 25 centuries in mankind's measurement of time. The Creation Intelligent Formulator gives the intelligent creatures mankind (that can reason) and (aliens also) their reason for being, their guide for what they should be doing, their goal, that they should be striving toward & their life and death philosophies. This subject changes in mankind's time frames. The first survival activities were composed of food gathering & securing shelter concept of God (Creation Intelligent Formulator) was surly different that of an individual conception in our modern time as well as that of the individual's in the next two time frames before this modern time frame. The second major time frame of mankind's survival activities and a major change in the individual's reasoning was in growing food to harvest as well as the food gathering from nature above. Securing shelter and other services & commodities as Economies and division of labor developed. The third major change was in the industrializing of the production of food, shelter, commodities and services in harvesting of the Creation Intelligent Formulators resources as well as the previous two times frames activities. The forth major change is now in the harvesting of knowledge that the formulations of math have been utilized in the major economic substance, like the burning of coal in the previous major change (coal that is a resource the creator provided) which evolved into other fossil fuels as well as growing organic fuels and Atomic Energy; now the basics of math are being used in our information exploitation. Jesus Christ, his Apostle and Profits in their previous dimension of time both by mankind's measurement and Gods everlasting steady state measurement of time and my analogy of science:E=MC^2 Time in the speed of light see page 2 and my hypothesis of the dimension of time; (motion through space) see page 2. Other religions have had God (Creation Intelligent Formulator) revealed to them as Christ revealed Christianity to his religion. Religiosity was revealed to me in respect to mankind's political behavior (decision making process) by the Methodist College Professor of theologies in the computer department that studies the religiosities of organizations and individuals. In my study of Biology my inelegant introverted Analogy of the Creation Formulator (God) is in the DNA.
22317 Today I insert (decision making process) in our nation under our president Donald Trump in his executive order against defenseless immigrants from 7 muslim nations, and undocumented persons from south of our border who come here to work for a living wage to be deported in in his desire to get the criminals out of USA. This is the reason for many protest across our nation and also his doing away with Obama health care. There has been many town hall meetings on these concerns. There are many sanctuaries being set up like like the underground railroad for persons being denied their human rights in this decision making process.
22817 Copied from wix.com to days post:
Continue from last comment above President Donald Trump speech to USA Government House and Senate on His recommend Budget cuts and military buildup plus health care overhaul.
Pruitt's comment on: Trump to tout rollback of “burdensome” Regulations EPA. He will propose a imagination reform Bill with compromises. The decision making process were isolation nationalism to be the main focus for our government that will give a economic peak then a bad fall as in the past.
3217 AG Session, Richard Blumenthal says Jeff Session owes comitee before FBI where he committed serious misstatement in his relation to Russian Ambassador. He recused himself on any of Donald Trump's campaign as Attorney General. Trump has turned down the usual ethics training for members of his new administration. His decision making process is not going smoothly at all.

02 Fundamental facets of my analogy of science. PAGE 2. A facet of creation E=MC^2 meaning orthese symbols used by Albert Einstein is also used by me in my intellectual, introverted study of creation fundamental facets in the following analogy: E's (Energy) motion through space = (equals) is made up of M(Mass) the confined path of this motion through space times (the speed of light) times (the speed of light. The fundamental facet of this Creation Analogy is not the Big Bang in an instant of time (standard of science as currently understood by the majority of Scientist ) as claimed by Steven Hawkins versus a Steady State Universe but with the fundamental facets being Steady State where the Big Bang Facet is only an integral of one instance of time, not the continuum in time of the Steady State Universe where E = MC^2 as given in the Analogy above. My Hypothesis of a Steady State Universe . The Facet of Time in my Analogy is the motion through space of energy in the confined paths of mass, or in the confined paths of photons or other particles of atoms plus their more linear paths through the universe ( which are also the cases of other fundamental particles like quarks, antiquarks, gluons, hadrons & mesons). The energy that mass is composed of in the motion through space ( Time ) after a certain period in the physical universe can be changed by E = MC^2 Analogy to a form of energy in time so as to cycle back to the area in time of its origin in the facet of the Big Bang in an instant in time and there by completing the Analogy of the Fundamental Steady State Universe contingent on my hypothesis of the dimension of time (the motion through space of energy in the form of mater in confined paths of mass, or in the confined paths of photons or other particles of atoms plus particles like quarks, antiquarks, gluon’s, hadrons, & mesons) E = MC^2. Note any path is not linear but is a curve & (all lines are curves as I heard approximately 50 years ago when Albert Einstein stated this). These are my Fundamental Facets of my Analogy of the dimension of time. The dimension of time is motion through space of energy in the form of mater on either side of the equation E = MC^2 following a curved path so as to complete the cycle that is my Analogy of the dimension of time for mankind's science. Examples: The cycle of energy cloud in the confined path of the electron a quantity of energy in a curved path within its shell around the nucleus of an atomic mass so as to complete a cycle at the speed of light. This relative small dimension of time compared to the relatively larger dimension of time, the motion though space of energy in the form of mass E = MC^2 of the mass of the earth in its curved path in its orbital shell around the sun in a cycle of one year (mankind's unit of time measure) at C = 2.997923 x 10^10 cm per second + or .000008 ( the second being a fraction of a year ) with another facet and dimension of time the rotation of the earth a year mankind's unit of measure factored in. See above for Analogy of Religiosity .
03 The hypothesis of the make up of Ether medium that is like in the Undulatory Theory of light permeates all space and transmits transverse waves and also the medium like that which transmits radio waves in my Analogy the Ether medium is the network of shells about the nucleus of every atom that the energy of the atom=s electrons can in their confined path's rise to higher levels in. Even outside the highest level of the electrons in these possible shells energy occupied by the photons in instances of time. At this point the facets of my analogy of time above is further defined here: Albert Einstein’s time constant C in his equation solved for mass M = E / C^2 and solved energy in his famous formula E = M * C^2 is where I come up with my analogy concept of time which is uniquely mine at this time. The reason why I beginning Algebra Mr. Saddler got me started as follows:instead of using symbols to represent quantity is that in 7th and 8th years of my schooling at Addison, New York my math teacher in teaching is in equations;Use the words that describe these quantities. I did this but it made me poor at math including algebra because just manipulating symbols is much faster and easier than doing math in my introverted way he probably got me started on. But per the old saying in every cloud there is a silver lining. Because of this, what the vast majority of scientists and mathematicians in their excellent symbol manipulation in science and math they may have thrown out the baby with the bath water! Albert Einstein’s C to me (2.997923*10^10 cm per second + or ‑ 0.000008 in metric linear measurement in a second unit measurement of time) the speed of light photons or wave fronts through the ether in outer space or vacuum or other excellent medium is, time, to my mathematical introverted way of thinking is motion through space of any of these mediums which I call either when squared so as to be an area measurement constant of time. I think this is why Albert Einstein dealt with gravity in his concept of a plane warped so that mass M or energy moving on it would take the path of least resistance in moving through space medium. In my analogy inertia and gravity work through the ether of these same networks of shells that extend around the nuclei of every atom in the confined paths of energy along its curved path in its transfer or force field functionality. Facet of Michelson & Morley’s experiment to verify the presence of the ether that went wrong: It has occurred to me that if the motion of the earth through the ether which the experiment was trying to detect and failed to find. Then according to my hypothesis it is possible that the speed of light which was to appear to vary being populated through their hypotheses the speed of light would be constant through my concept of the ether’s make up relative to the earth’s motion through space with all its atoms and their network of shells so that the speed of light would be constant relative to earth. 6. My hypothesis of gravity and inertia which is like my previous hypothesis and analogies are also part of my Unified Field Theorem hypotheses. My hypothesis of the make up of ether now becomes the network of shells around all the atoms in the universe that forms the field nodes that
04 physical forces act on. Though other electromagnetic fields like light and radio waves the Unified Field hypotheses and my hypothesis of gravity and inertia will be recorded here now with inertia being the first next. My analogy of E = M C^2 that led me in the hypothesis of ether make up of shells network around the atoms nuclei of an object also becomes the basis of the concept and hypothesis of inertia. 6112000 Jack L. Doan's Analogy Unified Field Theorem Integrated Intuitions: Inertia unify with Momentum ; Acceleration unify with Deceleration ; Increase Gravity unify with Decrease in Gravity;
{see Blog Equation t' below}
Time unify with Motion Through Space ,” t’ = t *√ ((1 – v^2) / C^2) ” … See Relativity for the Layman Page 65. Jack L. Doan's Analogy Time = Motion Through Space. Before proceeding review the book that Albert Einstein wrote on it's cover (Gives a really clear idea of relativity, by Albert Einstein ). Relativity for the Layman E=MC^2 A simplified account of the history, theory, and proofs of relativity with illustrations by the author, James A. Coleman. A mentor book published by The New American Library. Copyright 195460.
05
First look at page 120, chapter 7, 3rd printing, April 1960 The Unified Field Theory An example Apages 120, 121 and 122″ could be expressed mathematically by Newton's approximate law (equation ￼ : F = (G M m / d^2) Where M is the mass of one object, m that of the other, d the distance between them, and G the gravitational constant. But, we also know of other types of forces which are similar to gravitational attraction. Two unlike electrical charges (a negative charge and a positive charge) will also attract each other with a force given by the equation 10: F = CQq/ d^2 Where Q is the amount of negative charge, q that of the positive charge, d the distance between them and c a constant. This particular formula is called Coulombs Law after it=s discoverer. We also have a similar formula given by the force of attraction between two unlike magnetic poles (a north magnetic pole and a south magnetic pole). Equation 11: F = K Mm/ d^2 Where similar to the other two formulas, M is the pole strength of the north magnetic pole, m the pole strength of the south magnetic pole, d the distance between them and K another constant different from the previous G and C. Skipping to the bottom of page 21 the attempt to derive these equations from more fundamental theory comprises one particular aspect of the Unified Field Theory. The general purpose of the unified field theory is much broader than this, however. It is an attempt to deduce all the physical phenomenon we know from a few simple fundamental principles. Skipping to the bottom of page 22 Einstein=s approach to the problem was to consider the field itself in an effort to understand the basic underlying properties of fields in general. Then gravitational, electric and magnetic fields would follow on as special cases and the general theory of relativity (since it is a theory of gravitation ) would be derivable from the unified field theory.In 6. Above my hypothesis sets up my disclosure of my hypothesis on the fundamental principles of his concept of the Unified Field Theory. Now, in further expanding on this information, the Fundamental Principles are continued. Initially start with my concept of time and how my concept evolved and is evolving. Simple statement: Time is motion through space. Now expanding definitions. First the motion of what? In my introverted intelligent initially from my early school days I defined time as the movement of the earth around the sun as it rotates on its axis. Then recognizing this was in terms of a physical solid
06 I questioned what is this matter the solid is made up of? On my own, with the inspiration of the little that I have heard of Albert Einstein's thinking, I decided matter in the form of mass was made up of energy divided by the speed of light squared M = (E/C^2). In not knowing about any string theory, on my own, I thought of mass made up of atoms being made up of lines of energy divided by the speed of light squared so as to make spiraled string in the area of the atom and beyond.#1 Analogy of atoms with position of the nucleus being the starting point of this string that in a 06 four dimensional spiral that curves in three dimensions and time, the fourth dimension, this string of energy . This string spiral next reaches the radius of this spiral at the inner shell of the electrons #2 analogy of another smaller similar string spiral interacting at much smaller radii. There is the possibility of energy from the #l analogy spiraling energy string to under certain circumstances of additional energy (to be defined later, such as heat) to move from that #1 analogy string from the electrons #2 analogy string of energies as the #1 analogy string passes on out to a greater spiral radius to the 2nd shell radius of #2 analogy of the electron interacts the smaller string spirals with #1 analogy the larger atom string spiral. Energy could be passed on into these strings in two ways, 1. Like in the first shell and 2. By at a certain level of motion through this atomic space of energy being moved into the first level shell until it was at a significant level of energy moving within the #2 analogy spiral string interacting electron smaller radius that the one or more of the #2 analogy electrons moved to the second shell level along the source #1 analogy string of the atom that these #2 analogy string spirals can move along at significant energy levels. In other words the electrons from the first shell with enough energy could jump to the second shell or even further. Here there are also the possible #3 analogy of 3 different times because of the 3 different string spirals of motion through space of these analogies of energies. Like the possibility of three different systems with the observed time (motions through 3 different string spirals with their part of space being 3 different times). The time of living cells has not been discussed yet. So, moving to the valance electron shell levels of the #l analogy of the atom spiral string of energy level is important to the physical matter that living cells interact with. The #1 analogy energy string moving through space at greater spiral radii than the valance electron shell levels now extend beyond the normal atom radius scientifically set in living cells physical definition of matter. But the analogy atoms spring string of energy through less dense spirals motion through space and the atoms observed time with energy from the electrons interacting spirals that may transfer some of its excess energy from the outer valance shell level to moving electrons #2 spiral energy analogy or photons #4 analogy of spiral string energy even smaller than electrons #2 analogy spirals. The photons are transferred and electron spirals may drop back along the atom spiral energy string path to a lower lever shell radius. The photon travels out along the #1 analogy energy spiral string along with possible electrons and other electromagnetic effects that can form effects on this string like waves created in the electrons movement or the photon movements through space and the atom spiral energy away to greater than the atoms electron valance level of spiral radii. Now we are after we pass the Vanderwall atomic radii shell level of #1 analogy energy string spiral where some interaction of the other atoms energy spirals at this level can be having their valance electron analogy #2 energy spiral trying to gain access to this present atoms #1 analogy energy spiral string and thereby exerting a small force on it. After this shell level radii of the atom the close distance force of Vanderwall type which I call ether matrix of these interacting spirals of energy from this and other atoms in this system by F = V Mm/d^2
07 becomes less strong where V the Vanderwall force constant, M the mass of the atom being observes, m another atom being interactive with present system or outside the present system, d the distance between them is my new F (force) in this expanding Unified Field Theorem fundamental principle of my new and unique concept #1 analogy of spiral energy string could require constants similar to V picked here at the Vanderwall shell levels arbitrarily picked as the F in this atom shell level that extend to infinity which gets smaller to (1/infinity^2) one divided by infinity squared in respect to the distance between two masses in this case an atom and the rest of the atoms in the system the atom is in and all the other systems in the universe the masses constant of Unified Field Theory proportionality will themselves proportionally change as the masses atomic radii change in respect to the spiral string functionality in this non consistent ether. The discussion up through here has been on the outward part of the energy string theory spiral that extends large distances. The more significant part of the energy string spiral is the inward part that ends in the nucleus of the atom. This is the part of the energy string theory spiral that causes attraction between atoms, masses and systems, electrical charges. From the Mathematics Life Science book by David Bergamini Life, Sciences Library, revised edition of the Time/Life book, copyrights 1980, page 165, The birth of an idea that shocked the world Einstein pieced out a strange theory called ARelativity@ which said that time, length and weight are no absolutes but, vary according to the speed. Now at the start of this first paragraph AAlbert Einstein sat in a Swiss patent office puzzling over unusual scientific observations – indications that the universe was not acting in precisely the way that Newton's longaccepted laws said it should. The speed of light for example, appeared to be constant in all experimental observations, no matter how fast the light source or the observer moved with respect to the beam. In My New and Unique Concept this is because the ether that MichelsonMorley experiment was to detect, the ether was not accurately hypothesized. My Hypothesized Concept of ether is the #1Analogy Spiral Energy String Theory that extends from the individual atoms of the mass systems of matter in ether outside and inside matter from the light source where Photons #4Analology travels in strait paths interacting with #1Analogy.to the different system of mass in the matter of the observer in the MichelsonMorley experiment setup. The speeds of photons moving in strait lines interacting with these strings that ether comprises to the individual atom strings and strait line waves of photons which they form are traveling at the constant speed of light, 2.997923(10^10) Meters per second in this medium of #1Analogy of energy spiral string theory of spiral paths that are thousands of meters radii from the matter of the system out in what was considered a complete vacuum of space or contained ether but on what my concept the #1Analogy Ether which is not like the ether MichelsonMorley experiment had conceived. The energy strings of #1Analogy become thinner the greater the distance from the nucleus of the atom energy spiral string as it goes out to near infinity where it is nearly infinity thin on both the outward part and also going out on the inward part of this spiral that closes in the nucleus. I will discuss the #5 through #10Analogy Energy spirals that are smaller like the electrons & photons size within the nucleus of atoms later in this disclosure.The photon's #4Analogy smaller energy string theory system is repelled in strait lines interacting
08 with the #1Analogy energy spiral string theory at the velocity of light away from the source atom electron shell as the electron shell level gives up this new bundle of energy. And also the ether matrix of different atoms strings both repel and attract depending on the part of #1Analogy energy string spiral, the smaller energy string spiral of the small system photon is interacting with causes it to move at the speed of light whether it is leaving the source system it is being repelled from or being attracted to the receiver system of the observer. Therefore, this new and unique concept of the force of attraction from the inward part of the spiraling energy string theory causes magnetic attraction, electrical charge attraction, Vanderwall attraction and Gravity as well as helping with its function of holding valance electrons in their shells & all electrons in their shells and the nucleus spiral systems in the nucleus area of the atom. These Forces will be further analyzed in my unified field theorem that may not leave credence to an ever expanding universe. Also the spiral string theory, both on the outward parts and then on the inward parts of the spirals of the many atoms in the universe is the ether that the small energy spiral string theorem photon units at the velocity of light leave the curve spiral string theory energy pattern of #1 analogy and interact in a straight line path as smaller photon spiral string energy is repelled away from the source atom or attracted to the atoms inner spiral energy string of the receiving atom by this Unified Field Theorem. I have started reading ARelativity For The Layman@ from the start and Einstein and others theories put forth in this book all fit with my new concept of #1 analogy of the string theorem of energy spirals. It explains why there were problems in the theorems that were expressed before Einstein=s special theory of relativity and attempts at a Unified Field Theorem and as I continue to read about his general theory of relativity I will review and express how my concepts fit below. Continuing reading ARelativity for the Layman page 78 refers to equation on page 57 Equation 2: m = M / Sqr=t ( 1 – ( v^2 ) / C^2 ) As Mass m increases with increase in v ( Velocity ). The spectral lines split in the atoms spectrum analysis because of rosetteshaped orbits of the electrons in this atoms elliptical electron orbits the character of the splits of the spectral lines depending on the type of atom. My concept of mass increase per the above equation is #1 Analogy energy spiral string theorem in mass of atoms moving through the ether formed in the atoms energy spirals string theorem beyond the system of the matter into space very similar to page 58 A An analogy illustrating the mass increase with velocity occurs with a ship moving through the ocean. Some water is always dragged along behind the ship. And the faster the ship goes, the greater the amount of water dragged along. The ship thus effectively acts as if its mass increases as the velocity increases, since the water being dragged along moves with the ship and becomes part of the ships bulk.
09 The ether wind that was expected in the Michelson and Morley performed experiment would not be a factor in my concept and the page 38 and 39 of Relativity for the Layman@ possible explanation for Michelson and Morley=s results all are possible in my concept of ether composed of #1 Analogy Spiral Energy String Theory matrix throughout the finite universe. As to the dragging along of the ether by a mass moving through it is only partly true. First, because the source of the small part of the ether the mass is moving through is in the mass. Second, the movement of the energy in the #1 Analogy Spiral Energy String Theorem paths part of the mass beyond the part of the masses matter that is moving at the velocity v in equation 2. This energy that is part of the equation 5: E = M C^2 is moved along in the #1 Analogy Spiral Energy String Theorem paths, and that part outside of the atom valance shell is the part of the universes mass that scientists up to now haven=t been able to account for. See review of Stephen Hawking's Universe later in this scientific analogy. From ARelativity for the Layman@, page 38, where I disagree with the last phrase of the second paragraph Awe know that the ether cannot be dragged along with the earth. Where I noted NO to this phrase per #1 Analogy by Jack L. Doan. So similarly I maintain No to the quote, the other objection to this possibility is concerned with the Fresnel Drag Coefficient. As we mentioned earlier in this chapter, it was found that some materials did act as if they dragged the ether along with them, but this was only a partial drag, i.e., the ether appeared to come along with only a fraction of the velocity of the moving object. Here, however, it would be required that the ether be dragged along at the full velocity of the moving earth. My #1 Analogy like above would disagree with MichelsonMorley concept of ether and the continuing of the above quote. Here however, it would be required that the ether be dragged along at the full velocity of the moving earth. Furthermore, it was not known whether an object as large as our earth would conform to the Fresnel Drag Coefficient since Fizeau's verification of the drag effect was made on a laboratory scale only.@ So next go to page 30 of ARelativity of the Layman. AFresnel's Ether Drag A possible explanation for the failure to detect this effect was contained in the theory advanced by Fresnel in 1818. He believed that ether was thicker in material bodies than it was in vacuum or outer space and that, as a result, when a transferred object such as a telescope lens moved through the water, it dragged some of the ether along with it in much the same way a moving ship drags some water behind it. On the basis of this assumption, Fresnel computed the amount of the ether drag as a certain fraction as a velocity of the moving object, in this case the telescope lens. This fraction came to be know as the Fresnel Drag Coefficient. The net effect would be that whether the telescope was traveling toward the incoming light waves or away from them, the ether would be dragged along with the telescope; it would be impossible to detect the effect, since to do so it would be necessary for the ether to stay put while the telescope moves through it. In this case above #1Analogy Spiral Energy String Theory extendingfrom the atoms of the water (used next in the continuing quote of Fizeau experiment@ would be a small but dense amount of #1 Analogy ether moving with the running water in this laboratory experiment. This would be a very good experiment to verify some small first step in proving the theory contained in #1 Analogy Spiral Energy String Theorem as well as a means to develop the above outline of Jack L. Doan's Analogy Field Theorem integrated. 1. INERTIA <—–>
10 MOMENTUM. Now, continuing with Relativity for the Laymen skipping one paragraph on page 31. Since the Fresnel Drag Coefficient was only theoretical and had no direct experimental proof to support it (except the indirect evidence presented by the inability to detect the ether), an experiment was needed which would measure the velocity of light in a fairly dense material which was itself moving. This was done by Fizeau in 1859. He used moving water and measured the velocity of light beam traveling through the water in the same direction as the water movement, and then again in the direction opposite to the water movement. He found that the velocity of light and water was affected by the fact that the water was moving, i.e., the result was as if the water dragged the ether along with it by the same amount given by the Freznel Drag Coefficient. Because this Freznel's ether drag better fits my concept of ether than that of Michelson and Morley in 1881 experiment concept of the stationary ether postulated that the next paragraph in this continued quote pertains to and not my concept of #1 Analogy Spiral Energy String Theorem of ether as conceived by Jack L. Doan I continue that quote: The reader should not believe that as a consequence of all this it was proved that the ether really existed and that it was dragged along with a moving object so that it escaped detection. The Freznel Ether Drag Theory was a possible explanation if and only if the ether existed and behaved as outlined. In1881 but today this Freznel drag coefficient and the Fresnel improved on type of experiment would make a good first step in developing #1 Analogy spiral energy string theorem as well as Jack L. Doan's Analogy Unified Field Theory integrated item 1 <—–> Momentum.Next back to page 79 Relativity for the Layman where I am now reading the quote the electrons mass and would verify the massincrease effect predicted by the special theory splitting of the spectral lines was the first observed and announced by Paschen in 1916, when he was investigating the spectrum of helium. It is interesting to note that one month after Peschen published his discovery, the Sommerfield theory was published which predicted the splitting of the spectral lines on the basis of the special theory of relativity – and again the mass – increase effect of the special theory of was verified..Atomic Accelerators – Additional examples of the mass increase with velocity have come from spectacular results of the giant atom – smashing machines which have been built to investigate the structure of the atomic nucleus. The primary purpose of these machines is to accelerate various atomic particles to high velocities; the more powerful the machine, the higher the velocities and the higher the velocities, the greater the mass of the particle becomes, according to the mass – increase formula. At this point #6 & #7 Analogies Spirals Energy Strings Theory of Atomic Nucleus in Jack L. Doan's unified field theory: the theory of how the spiral energy string #1 Analogy on the inward traveling part of the spiral energy string arrive at the nucleus area of the atom inside of the nucleus shell radii #6 Analogy of the neutron spiral energy string theory is created from this energy coming into the atom from the inward part of #1 Analogy Spiral Energy String theorem. The energy of
11 this #6 Analogy Spiral Energy String passes its excess energy to a positron #7 Analogy Spiral Energy String theory also more than one of #6 & #7 Analogy Spiral Energy Strings Theories, or #7 with no #6 neutron spiral energy string theories can exist in the shell radius of the atoms nucleus. The positron is the source of the beginning of the outward #1 Analogy Energy String theorem. Also, within the nucleus, positron and neutron there can be one or more other smaller #8, #9, #10 and more spiral energy string theories. All of these analogy spirals energy string theories are mass composed of energy from E = MC^2 where M = E/C^2 . In my theory the spiral energy string theorem is divided by (2.997923 meters of distance relative to the energy per second) squared forming the fields mass is comprised of. The energy in the spiral travels at the speed of light C. Also, the photons that are repelled from the electrons shell of an atom travels in a straight line relative to #1 Analogy Spiral Energy String theorem. Before proposing the second great step in developing an experiment for an atom – smasher accelerator the tools of quantum physics and tensor algebra will be studied and applied to the Jack L. Doan's Analogies Unified Field theory. The #8Analogy Alpha Particles and *9Analogy Beta Particles which came from the splitting of the atom may or may not be part of #10Analogy Quarks and #11Analogy Antiquarks where alpha and quark be the outward parts of this still smaller spiral energy string theory likewise beta and antiquarks be the inward parts so that the Jack L. Doan's Analogy Unified Field Theory may in its integration combine the classification of these basic particles. Also the #12 Analogy Gluons, #13Analogy Hadrons and #14 Analogy Mesons may be similarly combined in the Jack L. Doan's #15Analogy Integrated Unified Field Theory. The Atomic Particles Accelerators have found that indeed there appears to be spiral energy strings that will be studied as this work continues on unified field theories in my integration of these analogies. With the results from using these tools I will try to convince the scientists that pick projects for atomic accelerators like at the Brookhaven National Laboratory that A in 1952 announced accelerating protons (nuclei of hydrogen atoms) up to 177,000 miles a second, which is about .95% of the velocity of light. As a result the mass of the proton was increased to about three times its original mass. And in June 1952, the California Institute of Technology announced it had succeeded in accelerating electrons (negatively charged particles with a mass of about .0005 that of the proton) to within a tenth of a mile a second of the velocity of light, or approximately .9999999 c! The corresponding mass increase was about 900 times the original mass! The energy of atomic accelerators throughout the world is continually being increased, with the result that the atomic particles used for the bullets in nuclear research will have larger and larger effective masses as their velocities come closer and closer to the velocity of light. So now the second great step in developing an experiment using an atom – smashing accelerator becomes an improved version of the first small step of developing verification of Jack L. Doan's Analogy Unified Field Theory. The flowing water of the first small step would be replaced by accelerating mass of single particle streams at near the velocity of light. And then a beam of light, maybe in laser will be passed very close to the dense #1Analogy spiral source just outside of these particles radii so as to see if the wave fronts of these photons are slowed by #1Analogy spiral energy string therm. Verifying Jack L. Doan's Unified Field Theory Integration. Also the effect of
12 this increased mass exerts. From the development of Jack L. Doan's Analogy Unified Field Theorem Integrated Outline 1. B. increases in gravity. Also further development 1. A. acceleration<——> dacceleration of 1. Inertia <—–> Momentum the photons that go strait out of the source atom will follow a space line curving per gravity of the universe. Next the addition of velocities of systems of mass making up the matter of the systems of matter approaching each other on a space line curve the atoms #1Analogy spiral energy string theorem combined in each system also interact as with each others combined system so that Jack L. Doan Analogy Unified Field Theory Ether associated with two different source systems drag the energy s spirals string theorem into new interface interactions so as to decrease the velocity of each system in the mass internal work of the of the areas of ether some distance from each system on an average of the half way point between the two systems. From Relativity For The Layman, page 180, Addition of Velocities@ AFizeau's experiment – we have seen in the previous chapter how the Special Theory predicts that if two rockets, A and B, are traveling toward each other in space they will each determine their relative velocity by Equation 4: AB = ( V A + V a ) / ( 1 + (V A V B) / C^2)We found that this relative velocity is less than the sum of A and B's velocities. We have seen, too, that Fresnel=s ether drag theory also predicted that the total velocity would be less than the sum of the two. Fresnel=s reasoning had been that objects moving through the stationary ether effectively dragged some of the ether along with them, which made the resultant velocity lower. If the Fresnel formula is applied to the rockets in space, it would predict their relative velocity by Equation l7: V AB = VA + VB (1VA^2 / C^2) where the expression in parenthesis is the Fresnel drag coefficient. The question here for #1 Analogy Spiral Energy String Theorem should by Jack L. Doan'' Analogy Unified Field Theorem Integrated as a starting point let Fresnel drag coefficient be the coefficient that applies to each system of atoms and their associated #1 Analogy Spiral Energy String Theorem. Assume the California Institute of Technology has approved so with the index of refraction factored in to the electron max velocity is still only .9999999 c and not knowing the mass of light photon set up possible experiment with Brookhaven's 1952 proton accelerator theoretically in the same tunnel as above, then the proton beam at .95 c is used. Use two proton beams like at the early 1952 Brookhaven National Laboratory experiment accelerating protons up to 177,000 miles per second approximately .95 of the velocity of light where the mass of the proton was increased to approximately three times its original mass. But, in this experiment send the protons in opposite directions for the two beams through a special observation chamber so that the two beams come as close as possible on the same space line curves so any relative velocity VAB can be observed.
13 V AB = VA + VB (1VA^2 / C^2) VAB = .95 c + .95 c ( 1 – (.95 c^2 / c)) VAB = .95 c + .95 c (1–.95^2) VAB = .95 ( 2.997923 ( 10^10) ) + .95 (2.997923 ( 10^10) (1.95^2) VAB = 3.125709468 (10^10) VAB / 2 = 1.562854734 (10^10) meter / second VAB / 2 – c = – 1.435077266 ( 10^10 ) meters per secondThe velocity of each proton beam appears to have slowed down to 1.562854734 ^10 meters per second – 1.435077266 ( 10^10 ) meters per second slower than the speed of light. The closing velocity VAB = 3.125709468 ( 10^10 ) meters per second. If VAB was 2* .95 c then the velocity 5.6960537 ( 10 ^ 10 ) meters per second was slowed – 1.435077267 ( 10^10 ) meters per second from that VAB without ether to 45.91204911 % of the closing velocity that had no ether effect so there would be significant slowing of a factor of more than 2 divisor or less than onehalf of initial closing velocity. The creation of analogies M = E / C^2 with this approach now becomes easier to conceive with respect to Creation Intelligent Formulator that is the basic theme of my thinking. Before now, years ago, like when onehalf through my tour in military service 68 – 22 = 46 years ago when not so easily to me the concept of energy making up mass and matter in the formulation of my analogies. Time, motion through space of a string of energy like that in a photon could be formed from this 0 mass when it was at rest but then caused to move with relative to another photon of 0 mass when it was at rest causes the energy strings of both when they both move so as not to occupy the same position became masses by bending to form the spiral analogies. Once this started in time the chain reactions come into being. The vector math that this postulation leads you to will be attempted with this easier approach. Once the photon chain of reaction was started billions of number 4 analogies then the other analogies in time occur all instantaneously being a starting point for all time. Could this be the instant that is called The Big Bang, but still a finite steady state universe!
110711 Print entire site.
30712 I agree with PBS How the Universe was made except J Waves instead of particles at the beginning after The Big Bang.
71916 I have used all my Blog Pages ( 11 ) I can not save information I will check to see if I can edit any of them. I will see if i can add here:
education.jlab.org/.../parti...
Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility
Neutron = 1.6749286*10^{}^{27} kg. Proton = 1.6726231*10^{}^{27} kg. Electron = 9.1093897*10^{}^{31} kg.
This is W10 Excel Spreadsheet see 51016 : Copied from Page New Instruments;
Hydrogen H


J_Constan

Photon n0

P1n0El1

Heliium He


Proton Ma




m


Kg


n=1El2P2n2


Kg


theory of the nuclear force, most of themass of protons and ...

n=1Bohr R

5.29E11


1.78E36




1.67E27


Neutron  Up quark  Proton (disambiguation)  Category:Proton










What are the exact relative masses of protons, neutrons and electrons?

2

1.06E10


3.57E36



Neutron

1.67E27


education.jlab.org/.../parti...










Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility

3

1.59E10


1.07E35



Electron

9.11E31


Neutron = 1.6749286*10^{27} kg. Proton = 1.6726231*10^{27} kg. Electron = 9.1093897*10^{31} kg.











4

2.12E10


4.28E35






Electron = 0.00054386734










Said another way, protons are only about 99.86% as massive as neutrons while electrons are only about 0.054% as massive as neutrons. While relative masses are nice if you want to compare protons, neutrons and electrons to one another, it doesn't tell you what the actual masses of these particles are. In kilograms, the masses are:

5

2.65E10


2.14E34






Neutron = 1.6749286*10^{27} kg










Proton = 1.6726231*10^{27} kg

6

3.18E10


1.28E33






Electron = 9.1093897*10^{31} kg










There is another unit, called an electron volt (eV), that scientists use when talking about small things like protons, neutrons and electrons. An electron volt is actually a measurement of energy, but scientists can get away with using it to measure mass since mass and energy are related by Einstein's famous equation, E = mc2. So, in terms of MeV (Megaelectron volts, 1 MeV = 1,000,000 eV), the masses are:










Neutron = 939.56563 MeV










Proton = 938.27231 MeV










Electron = 0.51099906 MeV

I could copy only on this Home Page out of 11 Pages.
Copied from End of page New Instruments;
7916 Rounding off the above numbers to 3.32E10 Bohr circumference / 137.036 J_Fine Structure Constant = 2.43E12 J_WaveLength Now is increased to J_2Shell circumference J_2WaveLength.
71016 I have made a program using number on Mac pro that uses the J_ElectronShell number times J_BohrRadius:
A B C D
Hydrogen H


A1*B3?

Photon n0

P1n0El1

Heliium He


Proton Ma




m


Kg


n=1El2P2n2


Kg


theory of the nuclear force, most of themass of protons and ...

n=1Bohr R

5.29E11

A3*B3

1.78E36




1.67E27


Neutron  Up quark  Proton (disambiguation)  Category:Proton

n



1.79E36






What are the exact relative masses of protons, neutrons and electrons?

2

1.06E10

A5*B3

3.57E36



Neuttron

1.67E27


education.jlab.org/.../parti...




1.78E36






Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility

3

1.59E10

A7*B3

5.35E36



Electron

9.11E31


Neutron = 1.6749286*10^{27} kg. Proton = 1.6726231*10^{27} kg. Electron = 9.1093897*10^{31} kg.




1.78E 36







4

2.12E10

A9*B3

7.13E36






Electron = 0.00054386734




1.78E36






Said another way, protons are only about 99.86% as massive as neutrons while electrons are only about 0.054% as massive as neutrons. While relative masses are nice if you want to compare protons, neutrons and electrons to one another, it doesn't tell you what the actual masses of these particles are. In kilograms, the masses are:

5

2.65E10

A11*B3

8.91E 36






Neutron = 1.6749286*10^{27} kg




1.79E36






Proton = 1.6726231*10^{27} kg

6

3.18E10

A13*B3

1.07E 35






Electron = 9.1093897*10^{31} kg


Copied from Page New Instruments 11916 : The J_Wave crest of outside of J_String radiates J_Photons smaller closed loop J_Strings with J_Wave length of their color J_Frequency on the outside of their J_String. J_PhotonJ_Mass 1.782662×10^{−36} kg from
Measurement  Unit  SI value of unit 
Copied from Wikipedia on 112315 I chose for J_Wavelength of Hydrogen color frequency:
I Pick (1/4863Angstrom) for predominant H frequency.
Hydrogen_predominant_color_Freq.xlsx
From the above Hydrogen predominant color Freq.xlsx file: 2.06E+06 cycle per sec Freq.
12016 Copied from Quora Digest in my Email:
Why didn't Albert Einstein win a Nobel Prize for his work on Special/General Relativity?
Richard Muller
Richard Muller, Professor of Physics, U. Calif. Berkeley, coFounder of Berkeley Earth
182.7k Views • Upvoted by James Mitchell, 1st class M.Sci in Experimental and Theoretical Physics from Cambridge and a D.Phil in Physics from…
Richard is a Most Viewed Writer in Physics.
The Nobel Prize generally limits itself to one prize per person in any given field. Arguably, the photoelectric effect (for which Einstein was awarded the prize) was even more important than relativity, since it was a founding discovery for quantum physics. Bohr had postulated that atoms emitted light only in quantized amounts; Einstein showed that light itself was quantized. Then de Broglie postulated that electrons were also quantized ... and quantum physics was off and running.
The double laureates were Marie Curie (physics 1903 and then chemistry in 1911), Linus Pauling (chemistry 1954, peace 1962). John Bardeen won two in physics, the first for the transistor; but the feeling was that they wanted to give it to his coworkers in superconductivity, and couldn't really leave him out. Similarly for Sanger in 1980.
So here is some useful advice: if you've won a Nobel Prize, and want to win a second one, work with a collaborator.
Updated Jan 11 • View Upvotes • Asked to answer by Suraj Vantigodi
Downvote
Comments29+
Share4
From Your Quora Digest
12116 The above program Hydrogen predominant color on J_Photon freq.xlsx Red N32:
Find Frequency 32 Red H color:


6.57E07


1.52E+06

Frequency

Red frequency 1/6.57E07 wavelength = 1.52E+06 cycles per Second.
This color Red is what your brain detects when this J_Photon is stopped by the rods and cones in the retina of your eye. The colors of J_Photons is started when J_Electron J_Wave frequency are J_Inducted on J_ClosedLoopJ_Strings outer surface J_Photons.
12216 Copied from above: J_PhotonJ_Mass=:
Mass 
eV/c^{2} 
1.782662×10^{−36} kg 
J_PhotonJ_Mass = 1.782662x1036 kg
J_PhotonJ_Momentum=:
Momentum 
eV/c 
5.344286×10^{−28} kg⋅m/s 
The Photon generic
Mass 
eV/c^{2} 
1.782662×10^{−36} kg * 137 may = 2.44E44
cicle per sec

72016 The Mac Pro Spread Sheet above the rounded off Photon generic ( 71016 ) Numbers values. Delta 1.78E36+ J_EnergyPhoton to increase from J_ElectronShell to next outer J_ElectronShell.
72116 The J_1WaveLength 4863A = 4.863E7 m =2.070393E6 Cycle per sec.?
Optical Frequency Combs
An optical "frequency comb" is a very precise tool for measuring different colors—or frequencies—of light. The technology, made possible by recent advances in ultrafast lasers, can accurately measure much higher frequencies than any other tool. Frequency combs are already widely used in metrology laboratories and physics research, and they are starting to become commercially available.
Optical frequency combs rely on the relationship between time—obviously a familiar concept—and frequency, which is less familiar to most people, but is simply the number of oscillations per unit of time. NIST scientists start with lasers that emit a continuous train of very brief, closely spaced pulses of light containing a million different colors. The properties of the light over time are converted to frequency numbers to make what looks like a comb. Time and frequency are inversely related; that is, smaller units of time (or faster oscillations of light waves) result in larger frequency numbers.
The graphic below shows how a few different colors of light oscillate over time. This example is greatly simplified, and the specific units are unimportant (in reality the units would be tiny fractions of seconds). The essential point is that the blue waves oscillate much faster than the red waves, and the yellow and green waves are somewhere in between.
A simplified graphic of a corresponding frequency comb is shown below. Each "tooth" of the comb is a different color, arranged according to how fast the light wave oscillates in time. The waves that oscillate slowly (red) are on the left and the waves that oscillate faster (blue) are on the right. Frequency is measured in hertz, or cycles per second. An actual optical comb does not begin at zero on left, but at a very high number, 300 trillion hertz.
A real optical frequency comb spans the entire visible spectrum of light, and has very fine, evenly spaced teeth. The teeth can be used like a ruler to measure the light emitted by lasers, atoms, stars, or other objects with extraordinarily high precision.
The type of laser used to make the comb is critical to the precision of the ruler. The shorter the laser pulses, the broader the range of frequencies in the comb. NIST scientists use "modelocked" lasers (see next paragraph) that emit femtosecond pulses lasting quadrillionths of a second, or millionths of a billionth of a second. The resulting comb spans several hundred thousand frequencies, or teeth, enabling flexible and accurate measurements of wideranging or widely varied phenomena.
Modelocking refers to how the laser light is formed into pulses. In all lasers, light is repeatedly reflected within a mirrored cavity. In a modelocked laser, the peaks of the different colors of light waves coincide at regular intervals, evenly spaced in time. The peaks build on each other to form very short, bright bursts of light, each containing many different frequencies (see graphic below).
The timing between pulses determines the spacing between the teeth of the frequency comb. NIST scientists use lasers that emit about 1 billion pulses per second. The faster the pulse repetition rate, the wider the spacing between the teeth, making each individual tooth easier to identify.
Finally, the stability of the laser determines the width of the individual comb teeth. A highly stabilized laser produces very fine teeth, enabling highly precise measurements of specific frequencies or changes in frequency. Special crystals, mirrors, and other techniques also are used to make the light waves and comb teeth as perfectly spaced as possible.
NIST Contributions to Frequency Combs
NIST has made a number of significant contributions to the development of frequency combs.
Physicist John Hall of JILA, a joint institute of NIST and the University of Colorado at Boulder, shared the 2005 Nobel Prize in physics for contributions to the development of laserbased precision spectroscopy, including the optical frequency comb technique. For instance, Hall and colleagues developed methods to stabilize lasers and a "selfreferencing" technique that ensures the comb teeth are in exactly the right places. This involves taking two measurements from different parts of a very broad comb and comparing the results to precisely known frequencies of an atomic clock.
NIST physicists and collaborators were the first to compare the operation of multiple femtosecond frequency combs, thereby demonstrating reproducibility, and to verify that both the starting position of a comb and the spacing between the teeth can be controlled precisely. NIST scientists also have demonstrated the most precise synthesis ever of optical frequencies, generating specific colors with a reproducibility of 19 digits. The experiments are a significant step toward nextgeneration "atomic clocks" based on optical rather than microwave frequencies.
NIST staff and collaborators also have extended the reach of frequency combs. One project extended the wavelength coverage 1,000 nanometers (a measure for wavelengths of light) farther into the infrared than ever before, while another effort at JILA created the world's first frequency comb in the extreme ultraviolet. In addition, NIST has shown that extremely stable microwave signals can be generated from optical frequency combs.
Applications of Frequency Combs
Frequency combs have dramatically simplified and improved the accuracy of frequency metrology. They also are making it possible to build optical atomic clocks, expected to be as much as 100 times more accurate than today's best timekeeping systems. Better clocks will lead to studies of, for example, the stability of the constants of nature over time, and enable improved technology for advanced communications and precision navigation systems, such as nextgeneration global positioning systems.
Today's best atomic clocks, and the international definition of the second, are based on the natural oscillations of the cesium atom, a frequency in the microwave region of the electromagnetic spectrum. Optical combs provide the equivalent of regularly spaced "gears" that can be used to link the slower "ticks" of microwavebased atomic clocks to the much faster, more precise "ticks" of optical clocks (see graphic below).
Highly accurate measurements of frequencies are also essential for many other advanced fields of science that require the identification or manipulation of atoms or molecules, such as detection of toxic biochemical agents, studies of ultrafast dynamics and quantum computing. As scientists continue to improve frequency comb technology and make it easier to use, it may be applied in many other research fields and technologies, from medical tests in doctor's offices, to synchronization of advanced telecommunications systems, to remote detection and range measurements for manufacturing or defense applications.
Frequency Combs as 'Gears' of a Clock
All clocks must have a regular, constant or repetitive process or action to mark off equal increments of time. Examples include the movement of the sun across the sky, a pendulum or vibrating crystal, or, in an atomic clock, the natural vibrations of atoms. Today's standard atomic clocks vibrate at microwave frequencies, about 9 billion cycles per second. Optical atomic clocks oscillate much faster, at about 500,000 billion cycles per second, and thus divide time into smaller units. But no electronic systems exist that can directly count these oscillations. A frequency comb, functioning like the electronics in a conventional clock, can be used to divide the oscillations of optical clocks into lower frequencies that can be linked to microwave standards and counted.
NIST News stories on Frequency Combs
 JILA Unveils Improved 'Molecular Fingerprinting' for Trace Gas Detection (October 13, 2010)
 JILA Frequency Comb System Detects Gas Impurities to Aid Semiconductor Manufacturing (August 3, 2010)
 Scientists Build First 'Frequency Comb' To Display Visible Teeth (October 29, 2009)
 NIST's LIDAR May Offer Peerless Precision in Remote Measurements (June 2, 2009)
 Optical 'Frequency Comb' Can Detect the Breath of Disease (February 19, 2008)
 First 2D Pictures of a 'Frequency Comb' Transform It into a Brush (February 7, 2007)
 "Frequency Comb" Spectroscopy Proves to be Powerful Chemical Analysis Tool (March 16, 2006)
For further information see:
M.J. Thorpe, K.D. Moll, R.J. Jones, B. Safdi, and J.Ye. Broadband cavity ringdown spectroscopy for sensitive and rapid molecular detection. Science, 17 March (2006).
J.L. Hall. Defining and measuring optical frequencies. Nobel Lecture, 8 Dec. 2005, available at: http://nobelprize.org/physics/laureates/2005/halllecture.html.
J. Ye and S.T. Cundiff, eds. Femtosecond optical frequency comb technology. (Springer, New York, 2005).
Femtosecond lasers for optical clocks and low noise frequency synthesis," in Femtosecond Optical Frequency Comb Technology: Principle, Operation, and Application, J. Ye and S. T. Cundiff, Eds., Springer, New York, p. 225 (2005).
R.J. Jones, K.D. Moll, M.J. Thorpe and J. Ye, Phasecoherent frequency combs in the EUV via highharmonic generation inside a femtosecond enhancement cavity. Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 193201 (2005). (Phys. Rev. Lett. Vol 94, No. 19, Cover Figure.)
S.T. Cundiff and L. Hollberg. Absolute Optical Frequency Metrology in Encyclopedia of Modern Optics (.pdf; download Acrobat Reader), B.D. Guenther and D.G. Steel, eds, (Academic Press, 2004).
A. Marian, M.C. Stowe, J. Lawall, D. Felinto and J. Ye, United timefrequency spectroscopy for global structure and dynamics Science Express, Nov. 18, 1105660 (2004). Science 306, 2063 (2004).
L. Ma, Z. Bi, A. Bartels, L. Robertsson, M. Zucco, R. Windeler, G. Wilpers, C. Oates, L. Hollberg, and S.A. Diddams. Optical frequency synthesis and comparison to uncertainty at the 1019 level (.pdf; download Acrobat Reader). Science, 303, 18431845, (2004).
J. Ye, H. Schnatz and L.W. Hollberg Optical frequency combs: from precision frequency metrology to optical phase control (.pdf; download Acrobat Reader). IEEE J. Selected Topics Quantum Electronics 9, 1041 (2003). (Invited)
S.T. Cundiff and J. Ye Colloquium: femtosecond optical frequency combs. Rev. Mod. Phys.75, 325340 (2003)
S.T. Cundiff, "Phase Stabilization of Ultrashort Pulses," J. Phys. D 35, R43R59 (2002).
S.T. Cundiff, J. Ye and J.L. Hall. Optical frequency synthesis based on modelocked lasers. Rev. Sci. Inst. 72, 37493771 (2001).D. Jones, S. Diddams, J. Ranka, A. Stentz, R. Windeler, J.L. Hall, and S.T. Cundiff. Carrier envelope phase control of femtosecond modelocked lasers and direct optical frequency synthesis (.pdf; download Acrobat Reader)," Science, 288, 635639, (2000)
S. Diddams, D. Jones, J. Ye, S.T. Cundiff, J.L. Hall, J. Ranka, R. Windeler, R. Holzwarth, T. Udem, T. Hänsch. Direct link between optical and microwave frequencies with a 300 THz femtosecond laser comb (.pdf; download Acrobat Reader), Physical Review Letters, 84, 51025105, (2000)
Length Scales in Physics
John Baez
Feburary 12, 2010
It's important when learning physics to get an idea of how big different things are. How big is an atomic nucleus? An atom? A cell? A planet? A galaxy? Often it's good enough to just have a rough idea.
If you are thinking about small things, its good to know about 4 important units of distance: the Bohr radius of the hydrogen atom, the Compton wavelength of the electron, the classical electron wavelength, and the Planck length.
1  The Bohr radius
If you want to know how big atoms and molecules are, you should start by understanding the Bohr radius. The Bohr radius r is the approximate size of a hydrogen atom in its ground state. It's only approximate, because the electron in a hydrogen atom is a fuzzy probability cloud, not a pellet whizzing around in a circular orbit! But that's okay.
I'd like to explain how the Bohr radius depends on the electron mass, the electron charge, and Planck's constant. In particular I want you to see why the Bohr radius is inversely proportional to the mass of the electron. This is an example of a general phenomenon in particle physics: a mass scale sets an inverse length scale.
Unfortunately, I forget what the Bohr radius equals, so I'll have to work it out.
First let's cheat and figure it out using dimensional analysis. (I want to prove to the real physicists there that I can do this stuff that mathematicians are usually scared to do.) We'll just get an orderofmagnitude estimate of the Bohr radius, modulo factors of 2, π, and the like.
So what could the hydrogen atom's radius depend on? It's two particles of equal charge attracted by the electric field, and it is kept from collapsing by quantum effects, namely the uncertainty principle. Since it involves a charged electron whizzing around, it'll depend on the electron charge e and the electron mass m. Since the electron is in a fuzzedout orbit because of quantum effects, it'll involve Planck's constant ℏ. Since the proton is 1836 times as heavy as the electron, one can be approximate it quite well by being fixed, so the Bohr radius won't depend much on the proton mass. (We are making an approximation here; a better approach uses the center of mass frame and our approach will be off by terms proportional to the mass of the electron over the mass of the proton.) This is not a relativistic calculation so we won't use c.
In short, the answer will probably involve:
and nothing else. Okay. So using dimensional analysis, what can we do with these to get a quantity with dimensions of length? e has dimensions of charge. If we absorb Coulomb's constant into the definition of charge, charge has dimensions of length times force^{1/2}, since
force = charge^{2}/distance^{2},
by Coulomb's law.
Thus
To combine these to get a length, we fiddle around. Note that ℏ^{2}/e^{2} has dimensions ML, so ℏ^{2}/me^{2} has dimensions L.
Therefore the Bohr radius is
r = ℏ^{2}/me^{2}
times some dimensionless constant. Cheating, I peek in my uncle's old physics text, The New College Physics  A Spiral Approach, since right now I just happen to have packed up all my other books. The dimensionless constant turns out to be 1, and the Bohr radius works out to be 5 × 10^{11} meters. Half an angstrom, in other words. Angstroms are the length scale of atomic physics.
Note that
r = ℏ^{2}/me^{2}
makes some sense in that it gets bigger when ℏgets bigger (more "quantum fuzziness" makes a bigger atom) and gets smaller when the electron's charge is bigger (more attractive pull). It also gets smaller when the mass of the electron gets bigger  here we see that bigger mass scales go with smaller length scales! But we want some understanding at a gut level why making the electron heavier would make the hydrogen atom smaller! It's known that this is true, by the way, because one can take a muon, which is just like an electron but 206.77 times heavier (and decays rapidly), and make muonic hydrogen which is about 206.77 times smaller. But why?
Here's a very shoddy "derivation" of the Bohr radius that makes it clear why a big electron mass would give small atoms! The uncertainty principle says that the product of the uncertainty of momentum and the uncertainty of position can't be too small:
Δp Δx ≥ ℏ
(leaving out factors of 2 etc.). Now in the hydrogen atom Δ x is just the Bohr radius and we can write Δ p, the uncertainty in momentum, as m Δv, where v is velocity. So we get
r = ℏ/m Δv. 1)
Note that I have replaced an inequality by an equality! That is because this whole argument is so bogus that it doesn't matter  all the = signs below should be read as "is approximately equal to [hopefully]". Mathematicians should learn to respect this sort of vague argument that physicists are so good at  one can often squeeze the right answer out of very sketchy reasoning!
We see here why bigger m give smaller Bohr radius r: the uncertainty principle allows us to "squish up" the wavefunction of a more massive particle in a smaller region of space with the same Δv. But how big is Δv? To complete this shoddy "derivation" of Bohr's radius, note that Δv is probably about equal to the velocity of a classical electron going around a proton in an orbit the size of the Bohr radius. How do we relate the velocity of an orbiting electron and the radius of its orbit? We can get an approximate answer by simply equating the kinetic and potential energy
m(Δv)^{2}/2 = e^{2}/r 2)
since the virial theorem says kinetic and potential energies are about the same magnitude. Now squaring 1) we get
(Δv)^{2} = ℏ^{2}/m^{2} r^{2} 3)
and dividing 2) by 3) we get
m/2 = e^{2} m^{2} r/ℏ^{2}
or ignoring the factor of 2, just
r = ℏ^{2}/me^{2}!
I have emphasized by the use of words such as "shoddy" that this is a rough heuristic argument and not at all a mathematical derivation of the Bohr radius. Indeed, no matter how sloppy our argument was it was bound to give the same answer as long as it was dimensionally correct. This should make one distrust the argument! But one can make it utterly precise, as Schrödinger did. We see at any rate that the Bohr radius can be guessed by essentially classical reasoning together with the uncertainty principle, and this length scale is naturally proportional to an inverse mass scale  the inverse of the electron mass!
2  The Compton wavelength of the electron
The Compton wavelength of a particle, roughly speaking, is the length scale at which relativistic quantum field theory becomes crucial for its accurate description. A simple way to think of it is this. Trying to localize an electron to within less than its Compton wavelength makes its momentum so uncertain that it can have an energy large enough to make an extra electronpositron pair! This is the length scale at which quantum field theory, which describes particle creation, becomes REALLY important for describing electrons. The Compton wavelength of the electron is the characteristic length scale of QED (quantum electrodynamics).
It's easy to guess how big the Compton wavelength is using the knowledge that it depends only on the mass of the electron, relativity and quantum mechanics. Mass has dimension M. Length has dimension L. Time has dimension T. In relativity we have a constant, the speed of light, with dimensions L/T, and in quantum mechanics we have a constant, Planck's constant, with dimensions ML^{2}/T = energy times time = momentum times position. These two constants enable us to express units of mass in terms of dimensions of inverse length. I.e.:
M = (ML^{2}/T)(T/L)1/L = ℏ/c 1/L.
So in particular the Compton wavelength should be about
L_{Compton} = ℏ/mc.
This is about 4 × 10^{13} meters.
In fact, this is usually called the "reduced" Compton wavelength. What people usually call the Compton wavelength is 2π times as big, about 2 × 10^{12} meters. That's because the wavelength of a wave is really not the reciprocal of its frequency: it's 2π divided by the frequency. But I'm not worrying much about factors of 2π.
We can also derive the Compton wavelength in a slightly more enlightening manner as follows. The energy of an electron at rest is
mc^{2}
as someone once noted. Say we try to confine an electron in a region of size L. Then the uncertainty principle says that its momentum can only be known up to an error Δ p, where
L Δp ≥ ℏ.
If we make L small enough Δ p will be so big the electron may have a kinetic energy bigger than twice the rest energy mc^{2}. This would be enough to form an electronpositron pair! This effect  the creation of new particles while trying to determine the position of old ones  will kick in at the Compton wavelength
L_{Compton} p = ℏ 4)
where here p is the momentum at which the kinetic energy of an electron is about mc^{2} (forgetting the factor of 2, naturally). Recall the soupedup version of E = mc^{2} good for moving particles:
E^{2} = m^{2}c^{4} + p^{2}c^{2},
and set the "kinetic energy squared" p^{2}c^{2} equal to the rest energy squared, (mc^{2})^{2}. We get
p^{2}c^{2} = m^{2}c^{4} or p = mc!
So by 4) we have
L_{Compton} = ℏ/mc
as before. Again, a mass scale sets a length scale.
I strongly advise the reader to take the ratio of the Bohr radius by the Compton wavelength to see how much bigger the atomic length scale is than the length scale at which quantum field theory becomes really important. It's about 137 if I didn't screw up. Of course this is a famous number, one over the fine structure constant. I let the reader work out what it is in terms of ℏ, e, and c. It's good to keep this in mind for a gutlevel understanding of microphysics: quantum field theory effects start really mattering for electrons on a distance scale 1/137 the size of the hydrogen atom. This is why people were able to notice these fieldtheoretic effects and develop QED not too long after they came up with a quantummechanical description of the hydrogen atom.
3  The classical electron radius
Another characteristic length scale is the length scale at which renormalization becomes really important. Renormalization is an aspect of field theory which deals with such issues as the fact that the electromagnetic field produced by an electron has energy and thus should be counted as part of the mass of the electron! The length scale at which these effects become really important is called the classical electron radius. It's important to note that it is really classical, not quantum mechanical, because it only depends on classical electromagneticsm, which doesn't involve ℏ, and the formula for the rest energy of an electron, which involves c but not ℏ. Indeed, renormalization was an issue in classical field theory before quantum field theory came along.
So the classical electron radius should just depend on the mass of the electron, its charge, and the speed of light. Recall these have units
so to get a length out of these we should form e^{2}/mc^{2}. So, without doing any real work, we can guess
r_{e} = e^{2}/mc^{2}.
We can derive the classical electron radius by working out the electric field outside of a ball having charge equal to that of the electron, e, and radius L, then working out the energy of this electric field, and then setting that energy equal to the electron mass m. Solving for L we get a formula for the electron radius r_{e}. In other words, the classical electron radius is the radius the electron would have to have for all of its mass to be due to the electric field it produced, assuming it was a charged shell. Up to miscellaneous factors we get
r_{e} = e^{2}/mc^{2},
of course; since the actual calculation is not very exciting I'll skip it.
It's worth noting that the classical electron radius is 1/137 as big as the Compton wavelength of the electron  the allimportant fine structure constant again! So we have 3 length scales:
e^{2}/ℏc.
It's a dimensionless constant depending only on ℏ, e, and c. In this respect it's more fundamental than any of the length scales mentioned, because all the length scales mentioned involve the electron mass, and one could work them out for particles other than the electron, whereas
e^{2}/ℏc
is truly universal, once you remember that the "electron charge" is nothing specific to the electron but is a basic aspect of electromagnetism that applies to all charged particles. (Yes, quarks apparently have charge 1/3, but that doesn't really affect my point.) In other words, the fine structure constant is a dimensionless measure of how strong the electromagnetic force is, and we have seen that it sets the ratio of 3 important length scales.
4  The Planck length
Now for one final length scale  still smaller. This is the length scale at which quantum gravity should become important  the Planck length l. On the scale of the Planck length, it's possible that the structure of spacetime becomes quite different from the fourdimensional manifold we know and love. Spacetime itself becomes a foam (according to Wheeler) or a bucket of dust (according to Wheeler) or a bubbling sea of virtual black holes (according to Hawking) or a weave of knots or tangles (according to Ashtekar, Rovelli, and Smolin). In short, it's weird, but beyond that nobody really knows. To be more precise, the Planck length is the length scale at which quantum mechanics, gravity and relativity all interact very strongly. Thus it depends on ℏ, c, and Newton's gravitational constant G. These have dimensions
so to get a length we have to use
L_{Planck} = (ℏG/c^{3})^{1/2},
This makes some sense because the bigger ℏ is, the more "quantum" the universe is, so the bigger the length is at which quantum gravity matters. Also, the bigger G is, the stronger gravity is, so the bigger the length is at which quantum gravity matters. The bigger c is, the less "relativistic" the universe is, so the smaller the Planck length is. Of course, Planck's constant and the gravitational constant are actually very small, so the Planck length is really small. The Planck length is about 1.6 × 10^{35} meters. This ismuch smaller than the length scales I was talking about before  ridiculously small. That's why we haven't seen any (obvious) signs of quantum gravity effects, and why it will be so hard to do any quantum gravity experiments.
Note that in all the previous three examples a length scale was proportional on the inverse of a mass  in particular, the electron mass. The Planck length is peculiar in that it does not depend on a mass in this way. Of course, it depends on the gravitational constant, which has a lot to do with mass! In fact, the combination of gravity, relativity and quantum mechanics sets a mass scale  the Planck mass  as well as a length scale. The Planck mass is huge (by particle physics standards) so the Planck length is puny.
A rough way of understanding the Planck length is as follows. Every mass determines a Schwarzschild radius  that is, the radius of the event horizon of a black hole having that mass. Now this is curious, in that I've been saying repeatedly that a mass scale sets an inverse length scale, but the radius of a black hole is proportional to its mass. Of course, this is dimensionally possible in that the gravitational constant involves units of mass. We'll work out the Schwarzschild radius of a given mass in a minute. But also every mass determines a Compton wavelength, as I explained earlier:
L_{Compton} = ℏ/mc 5)
We can then work out how big a black hole we need for its Compton wavelength to equal its Schwarzschild radius! This sort of black hole will have mass about equal to the Planck mass, and radius about equal to the Planck length.
What does this mean? Well, remember that the Compton wavelength of a particle is the length scale at which quantum field theory becomes very important in describing it. So the Planck length is the size of a black hole for which quantum field theory becomes very important. Hawking has predicted that black holes of any size emit radiation due to quantumfieldtheoretic effects  the bigger the black hole, the less radiation. His calculations treat the black hole classically and only use quantum field theory in treating the electromagnetic radiation. For a black hole about as big as the Planck length one would expect this approximation to break down drastically.
To be picturesque, we can say that if we have a black hole about the size of the Planck length, and we try to locate it to an accuracy equal to its radius, the Heisenberg uncertainty principle makes the the momentum of the black hole so poorly known that there may be enough energy around to create another black hole of that size! I warn the reader to take this with a massive grain of salt, since there is no good theory of this sort of thing yet  much less any experimental evidence. But people have sharpened this sort of thought experiment and seen that things get awfully funny at the Planck length. By analogy with particle physics, one might expect processes involving virtual black holes to be very important at this length scale. Hawking and others have written interesting papers on reactions induced by virtual black holes... but I would not take these predictions too seriously yet.
Okay  let's start with Newtonian gravity:
force = Gm_{1}m_{2}/r^{2}
and remember that we can write the potential energy as
V = Gm_{1}m_{2}/r
Now let's say we have a little particle with mass m_{2} in the field of a big thing with mass m_{1}, and let's compute its escape velocity. That's the velocity for which its kinetic energy plus the potential energy above is zero, i.e.:
m_{2}v^{2}/2 = Gm_{1}m_{2}/r
Calling m_{1} simply m, we get
v = (2Gm/r)^{1/2}
Black holes were in fact predicted before general relativity simply by noting that the escape velocity can become larger than c, so that light cannot escape! Since we are being deliberately sloppy in these articles, let's use that idea to guess the Schwarzschild radius of a black hole of mass m. We get
c = (2Gm/r)^{1/2}
or
r = 2Gm/c^{2} 6)
I don't have any books at hand at the moment, but I think this is close to the actual Schwarzschild radius. It could be a bit off, due the nonlinearity of general relativity. It's just one of those constant factors that we are blithely ignoring here. I'm shocked that even I kept the "2" around above!
Okay, so now set the Schwarzschild radius  6)  equal to the Compton wavelength  5)  and forget that darn "2", getting
m^{2} = ℏc/G
for the Planck mass. Plugging that into formula 1), we get the Planck length:
L_{Planck} = (ℏG/c^{3})^{1/2}
as expected.
baez@math.removethis.ucr.andthis.edu
There is a constant, cc , which is identical everywhere in the universe. It's the constant that defines the ratio of the timelike dimension to the spacelike dimensions. That is, it defines the relationship between movement and distance. As far as we can tell, that's absolute, everywhere in the universe, at all times. It's a fundamental property of space itself, having nothing whatsoever to do with light.
Light is a property of the electromagnetic field of the universe, a field defined at all points in space. Light moves at cc in a vacuum, because that's how a wave in that field propagates. That's where the misnomer comes in: we first discovered cc because we were studying light, so we called it "the speed of light". But it's really the other way around: light moves at the speed it does because of that constant.
Since then, we've discovered more about light (like the fact that it can interact in ways that make it propagate at speeds other than cc ). And we've discovered that cc affects things other than light; it shows up in everything having to do with the movement of things in space because it's a defining factor of movement and space. So really, the two should be separated.
It is barely possible that "the speed of light in a vacuum" might be different at other places or times in the universe. Light is subject to a couple of other constants that define the way it moves, and it's possible that those values might have been different much nearer to the Big Bang. Possible, but unlikely, as far as we can tell. It appears very unlikely that cc is anything other than completely and utterly constant.
Why is c, the speed of light in a vacuum, an integer?
Because In 1983 the metre was defined as "the length of the path travelled by light in vacuum during a time interval of 1⁄299792458 of a second. So when we take time measurements of the speed of light, we actually use it to define the length of the metre. So to be accurate, the speed of light is only an integer when measured in the metric system.
speed of light round off J_Standard m/s
c 3000000000 3.00E+09
81016 Continue from 8516 copied section:
It's worth noting that the classical electron radius is 1/137 as big as the Compton wavelength of the electron  the allimportant fine structure constant again! So we have 3 length scales:
each of which is 1/137 as big as the previous one. The Bohr radius depends only on ℏ, e, and m. The Compton wavelength depends only on ℏ, c, and m. The classical electron radius depends only on e, c, and m. Nice setup, huh? I suppose I should relent and tell you that this mysterious number 1/137, the fine structure constant, is just
e^{2}/ℏc.
Rounded off : c = 3.00E+9 m/s ; Bohr R = 5.00E11 m ; Comp Wl = 4.00E13 m ; re = 3.00E15 m
Rounded off : c = 3.00E+9 m/s ; Bohr R = 5.00E11 m ; Comp Wl = 4.00E13 m ; re = 3.00E15 m
m/s
m
m
m
c =
3.00E+09
Bohr R =
5.00E11
3.64964E13
2.66397E15
4.00E13
2.91971E15
The above values are / by (1 / 137) =
3.00E15
81116 If. The above values are treated as J_ Integers rounded off to approximate the values. (c = 3E+9 m/s): (Bohr R = 5E11 m); (Comp WL = 4E13 m); (re = 3E15 m).
81616 J_Paradigm has a world of new and unique descriptions so I must move on and not stay on all J_Atoms which would be similarly described.
File:Standard Model of Elementary Particles.svg
Commons is a freely licensed media file repository. You can help.
Summary[edit]
Derivative works of this file:
References[edit]
Licensing[edit]
File history
Click on a date/time to view the file as it appeared at that time.
File usage
Global file usage
The following other wikis use this file:
J_Gravity & J_Charge J_Link 82016 J_UPJ_Down J_Quarks J_Spins in the same direction given them a shared J_Anglar J_Momentum. The same type J_Linkage between J_StrangeJ_Charm J_Quark and J_TopJ_Bottom J_Quarks.
82616 The J_ChargeJ_Standard 1 eV (1):
In physics, the electron volt (symbol eV; also written electronvolt^{[1]}^{[2]}) is a unit ofenergy equal to approximately 1.602×10^{−19} joule (symbol J). By definition, it is the amount of energy gained by the charge of a single electron moved across an electricpotential difference of one volt. Thus it is 1 volt (1 joule per coulomb, 1 J/C) multiplied by the electron charge (1 e, or 1.602176565(35)×10^{−19} C). Therefore, one electron volt is equal to 1.602176565(35)×10^{−19} J.^{[3]} Historically, the electron volt was devised as a standard unit of measure through its usefulness in electrostatic particle acceleratorsciences because a particle with charge q has an energy E=qV after passing through the potential V; if q is quoted in integer units of the elementary charge and the terminal bias in volts, one gets an energy in eV.
The electron volt is not an SI unit and its value must be obtained experimentally.^{[4]} Like the elementary charge on which it is based, it is not an independent quantity but is equal to (1 J/C)(2 h α / μ_{0} c_{0})^{0.5} It is a common unit of energy within physics, widely used insolid state, atomic, nuclear, and particle physics. It is commonly used with the SI prefixesmilli, kilo, mega, giga, tera, or peta (meV, keV, MeV, GeV, TeV and PeV respectively). Thus meV stands for millielectron volt.
Atomic properties like the ionization energy are often quoted in electron volts.
In chemistry, it is often useful to have the molar equivalent, that is the energy that would be produced by one mole of charge (6.02214129(27)×10^{23}) passing through a potential difference of one volt. This is equal to 96.4853365(21) kJ/mol.^{[3]}
Contents
[show]Energy Template:Anchor Edit
Conversion factors:
For comparison:
In some older documents, and in the name Bevatron, the symbol BeV is used, which stands for billion electron volts; it is equivalent to the GeV.
MomentumEdit
In highenergy physics, electronvolt is often used as a unit of momentum. A potential difference of 1 volt causes an electron to gain a discrete amount of energy (i.e., 1 eV). This gives rise to usage of eV (and keV, MeV, GeV or TeV) as units of momentum, for the energy supplied results in acceleration of the particle.
The dimensions of momentum units are M^{ 1 }L ^{1 }T ^{1 }. The dimensions of energy units areM ^{1 }L ^{2 }T ^{2 }. Then, dividing the units of energy (such as eV) by a fundamental constant that has units of velocity (M ^{0 }L ^{1 }T ^{1 }), facilitates the required conversion of using energy units to describe momentum. In the field of highenergy particle physics, the fundamental velocity unit is the speed of light c. Thus, dividing energy in eV by the speed of light in vacuum, one can describe the momentum of an electron in units of eV/c.^{[7]} ^{[8]}
The fundamental velocity constant c is often dropped from the units of momentum by way of defining units of length such that the value of c is unity. For example, if the momentum p of an electron is said to be 1 GeV, then the conversion to MKS can be achieved by:
MassEdit
By massenergy equivalence, the electron volt is also a unit of mass. It is common inparticle physics, where mass and energy are often interchanged, to express mass in units of eV/c^{2}, where c is the speed of light in a vacuum (from E = mc^{2}). It is often common to simply express mass in terms of "eV" as a unit of mass, effectively using a system ofnatural units with c set to 1 (hence, E = m).
For example, an electron and a positron, each with a mass of 0.511 MeV/c^{2}, canannihilate to yield 1.022 MeV of energy. The proton has a mass of 0.938 GeV/c^{2}. In general, the masses of all hadrons are of the order of 1 GeV/c^{2}, which makes the GeV (gigaelectronvolt) a very convenient unit of mass for particle physics:
The atomic mass unit, 1 gram divided by Avogadro's number, is almost the mass of ahydrogen atom, which is mostly the mass of the proton. To convert to megaelectronvolts, use the formula:
DistanceEdit
In particle physics, a system of units in which the speed of light in a vacuum c and thereduced Planck constant ħ are dimensionless and equal to unity is widely used: c = ħ = 1. In these units, both distances and times are expressed in inverse energy units (while energy and mass are expressed in the same units, see Mass–energy equivalence). In particular, particle scattering lengths are often presented in units of inverse particle masses.
Outside this system of units, the conversion factors between electronvolt, second, and nanometer are the following:^{[3]}
Electron Volt (eV)
An electron volt is the amount of work done on an electron when it moves through a potential difference of one volt.
1 eV = 1.602*10^{19} J = 1.602*10^{12} erg = 1.182*10^{19} ftlb = 3.827*10^{20} cal
82816 J_ChargeStandardunit is the same as above units. The simplest J_eV (J_ElectronVolt is a J_Electron in rest J_Shell of J_Atom accumulating enough J_Energy to move to The next outer J_Shell. The amount of J_EnergryCharce in a J_Quark is a fraction of J_eV.
No theory can be proven, it can only be disproven. But both Einstein’s theories of Relativity (Special and General) have resisted a century of enthusiastic attempts at disproof. Many clever people have not liked them at all, and done their best to undermine them, without success. So the commonest view is that they are correct  so far as they go.
But they are limited. They do not describe the universe completely. Particularly in extreme conditions such as those near Black Holes or at the start of the universe, they are not a complete description of the universe.
So my view would be that they are a correct description of the universe for any practical purpose that I can make use of, and indeed for any theoretical purpose except in extreme conditions I will never encounter.
J_Paradigm J_Theories are pattering their disapprove ability after Pryor Art Theories. I claim none of Pryor Art as my own.