Re: Neutrons & protons inside nucleus have different structure than free-floating ones
Y.Porat
> Anomaly Helps Shed Light on Physics of the Nucleus - Science News - redOrbit
> "A new calculation clarifies the complicated relationship between
> protons and neutrons in the atomic nucleus and offers a fascinating
> resolution of the famous NuTeV Anomaly."http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/1713214/anomaly_helps_shed_light...
>
> > A new calculation clarifies the complicated relationship between protons and neutrons in the atomic nucleus and offers a fascinating resolution of the famous NuTeV Anomaly.
>
> > The calculation, published in the journal Physical Review Letters on June 26, was carried out by a collaboration of researchers from the Department of Energy's Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility, Tokai University and the University of Washington. It grew out of attempts to make sense of the complex environment found in the nucleus of the atom.
>
> > The calculation began with the EMC Effect, a famous result in the world of nuclear physics that showed that the structures of protons and neutrons in a nucleus are different from protons and neutrons found outside a nucleus.
>
> > "I was at CERN when the EMC Effect was discovered more than 20 years ago," said Anthony Thomas, Jefferson Lab Chief Scientist and an author on the paper. "It's such a fundamental piece of information about the structure of nuclei that I wanted to understand it."
>
> > Thomas and his colleagues, Ian Cloët, a JSA Thesis prize winner in 2008, and Wolfgang Bentz, a long term visitor at Jefferson Lab in 2008, had theorized that the internal structures of protons and neutrons are modified by the presence of other protons and neutrons inside the nucleus.
>
> > Meanwhile, another landmark result, the NuTeV Anamoly, provided Thomas and his colleagues with another puzzle regarding the nucleus
> > . Experimenters at Fermilab's NuTeV (Neutrinos at the Tevatron) experiment sent a beam of neutrinos into a steel target and measured the ratio of two types of subatomic particles - neutrinos and muons - that emerged. They found that about one percent fewer neutrino-target collisions produced neutrinos than predicted by the Standard Model.
>
> > "Many people were convinced that they had discovered evidence for physics beyond the Standard Model," said Thomas.
>
> > He and his colleagues pored over the experimental information and began applying their theories for the EMC Effect to it. They found that one common assumption that was used in the analysis of the NuTeV data involved a correction for a natural imbalance in the number of protons and neutrons in the nucleus of iron, the most common element in NuTeV's steel target.
>
> > "The correction made for the extra neutrons involved a subtraction of the structure function of the extra neutrons," Cloët explained. "But according to our theoretical model of the EMC Effect, those extra neutrons generate a force that subtly changes the structure of every proton and neutron in the nucleus."
>
> > The theorists went further, combining this newly discovered effect with another correction for the difference in masses of different quarks in the protons and neutrons (charge symmetry violation). When they applied the two corrections to the NuTeV analysis, they found that the experiment showed excellent agreement with the Standard Model.
>
> > As a consequence, the NuTeV result may now be interpreted as providing crucial evidence for the idea that the structure of a proton or neutron is fundamentally modified when it is bound in a nucleus.
>
> > "Now, the next thing is to carry out an experiment to test this explanation directly," Thomas said. "You can make measurements that directly test whether it's right or wrong."
>
> > This research was funded by the Office of Nuclear Physics within the Department of Energy's Office of Science. Jefferson Lab is managed and operated by Jefferson Science Associates, LLC, for the Department of Energy.
----------------------
and i said it many times in this NG
that according to my findings
SOME OF THE PORTONS IN THE NUC
LOOSE THEIR ELECTROC CHARGE
WHILE MAKING THEIR INER BONDING
INSIDE THE NUC ~~
and there result of it is even much more revolutionary then the
writers of that
article imagined !!
the result of it is as well something i try to pump' many years in
this ng:
**the number of electrons in a heavy Atom
is not the same as the number of Protons in it !!!*****!!!
and no more the common paradigm
that a heavy atom has
many shells of electrons
closer and more distant from the nuc
see my abstract :
and tables 2 and 3 there
and try to understand it from those tables
as well
http://sites.google.com/site/theyporatmodel/an-abstract
ATB
Y.Porat
--------------------------
erschro...@gmail.com
Where does it go? And if they do, you have to rearrange their
quarks. Where do the new quarks come from? Where do the old ones
go? Or do you have a Quark Change-O-Matic?
> WHILE MAKING THEIR INER BONDING
> INSIDE THE NUC ~~
>
> and there result of it is even much more revolutionary then the
> writers of that
> article imagined !!
Yep, proposing to violate most of the laws of physics is
revolutionary. It's like a chemist proposing that lead changes into
gold.
>
> the result of it is as well something i try to pump' many years in
> this ng:
>
> **the number of electrons in a heavy Atom
> is not the same as the number of Protons in it !!!*****!!!
We have those. They're called "ions." Didn't they cover that in
Chemistry for Nuts?
>
> and no more the common paradigm
> that a heavy atom has
> many shells of electrons
> closer and more distant from the nuc
>
> see my abstract :
> and tables 2 and 3 there
> and try to understand it from those tables
> as well
Might as well try to understand why pigs can fly.
Y.Porat
that quarks are about 10 percent of the story !!
Where do the new quarks come from?
ther differnce between the properties of protons
in th enuc and out of it
IS NOT IN QUARKS
in my findings it is by the electric charge
i am not resonsible for your quark story
did you ever tested the electric properties of a quark
did you ever got a separated quark ??
------------
Where do the old ones
> go? Or do you have a Quark Change-O-Matic?
>
> > WHILE MAKING THEIR INER BONDING
> > INSIDE THE NUC ~~
>
> > and there result of it is even much more revolutionary then the
> > writers of that
> > article imagined !!
>
> Yep, proposing to violate most of the laws of physics is
> revolutionary. It's like a chemist proposing that lead changes into
i ddint say all the laws of physics
you aid that
sogo on with your silly story of only 3 quarks
go play with them to the rest of your life !!!
and we will see how far you will go ??
and give me a break
> gold.
>
>
>
> > the result of it is as well something i try to pump' many years in
> > this ng:
>
> > **the number of electrons in a heavy Atom
> > is not the same as the number of Protons in it !!!*****!!!
>
> We have those. They're called "ions." Didn't they cover that in
> Chemistry for Nuts?
hey man
we are talking about the nuc
ie the constuents of nuc
ions are properties of Atoms
different ions are not changing the nuc
got it
>
>
>
> > and no more the common paradigm
> > that a heavy atom has
> > many shells of electrons
> > closer and more distant from the nuc
>
> > see my abstract :
> > and tables 2 and 3 there
> > and try to understand it from those tables
> > as well
>
> Might as well try to understand why pigs can fly.
> ----------------
it is not my fault if you are not cleaver enough
anyway
if you what to understand it
may be ask more questions --
yourself and me
AYB
Y.Porat
----------------------------
Y.Porat
> On Jun 30, 5:20 pm, Yousuf Khan <bbb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Anomaly Helps Shed Light on Physics of the Nucleus - Science News - redOrbit
> > "A new calculation clarifies the complicated relationship between
> > protons and neutrons in the atomic nucleus and offers a fascinating
> > resolution of the famous NuTeV Anomaly."http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/1713214/anomaly_helps_shed_light...
>
> > > A new calculation clarifies the complicated relationship between protons and neutrons in the atomic nucleus and offers a fascinating resolution of the famous NuTeV Anomaly.
>
> > > The calculation, published in the journal Physical Review Letters on June 26, was carried out by a collaboration of researchers from the Department of Energy's Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility, Tokai University and the University of Washington. It grew out of attempts to make sense of the complex environment found in the nucleus of the atom.
>
> > > The calculation began with the EMC Effect, a famous result in the world of nuclear physics that showed that the structures of protons and neutrons in a nucleus are different from protons and neutrons found outside a nucleus.
>
> > > "I was at CERN when the EMC Effect was discovered more than 20 years ago," said Anthony Thomas, Jefferson Lab Chief Scientist and an author on the paper. "It's such a fundamental piece of information about the structure of nuclei that I wanted to understand it."
>
> > > Thomas and his colleagues, Ian Cloët, a JSA Thesis prize winner in 2008, and Wolfgang Bentz, a long term visitor at Jefferson Lab in 2008, had theorized that the internal structures of protons and neutrons are modified by the presence of other protons and neutrons inside the nucleus.
>
> > > Meanwhile, another landmark result, the NuTeV Anamoly, provided Thomas and his colleagues with another puzzle regarding the nucleus
> > > . Experimenters at Fermilab's NuTeV (Neutrinos at the Tevatron) experiment sent a beam of neutrinos into a steel target and measured the ratio of two types of subatomic particles - neutrinos and muons - that emerged. They found that about one percent fewer neutrino-target collisions produced neutrinos than predicted by the Standard Model.
>
> > > "Many people were convinced that they had discovered evidence for physics beyond the Standard Model," said Thomas.
>
> > > He and his colleagues pored over the experimental information and began applying their theories for the EMC Effect to it. They found that one common assumption that was used in the analysis of the NuTeV data involved a correction for a natural imbalance in the number of protons and neutrons in the nucleus of iron, the most common element in NuTeV's steel target.
>
> > > "The correction made for the extra neutrons involved a subtraction of the structure function of the extra neutrons," Cloët explained. "But according to our theoretical model of the EMC Effect, those extra neutrons generate a force that subtly changes the structure of every proton and neutron in the nucleus."
>
> > > The theorists went further, combining this newly discovered effect with another correction for the difference in masses of different quarks in the protons and neutrons (charge symmetry violation). When they applied the two corrections to the NuTeV analysis, they found that the experiment showed excellent agreement with the Standard Model.
>
> > > As a consequence, the NuTeV result may now be interpreted as providing crucial evidence for the idea that the structure of a proton or neutron is fundamentally modified when it is bound in a nucleus.
>
> > > "Now, the next thing is to carry out an experiment to test this explanation directly," Thomas said. "You can make measurements that directly test whether it's right or wrong."
>
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> I did think of a simple representation, noncontradictive - but
> ultimately, the charge violations in the model I reviewed didn't
> matter as much as the issue it addressed.
>
> Still, good to know progress is being made :-)
-----------------------
and this is my main point !!!!
there is no charge violation!!!!
some Protons in the Nnuc
loose thier electric charge!!!
and that is one of the revolutionary points!!
actually very revolutionary
much more than you and others can imagine !!!
(i predicted it many years ago !!)
TIA
Y.Porat
--------------------------
Y.Porat
please go to he abstract of my site
http://sites.google.com/site/theyporatmodel/an-abstract
look there for the Iron scheme model
of the iron Nucleus
it is unprecedentedly described in detail
as if it was lying on the palm of your hand
(actually in my book since 1993 )
so see there the neotrons and Protons
neutrons are marked as 'black'
Protons as White longish structures
now please go on and see
that there are Portons there
that are connected with **both of their edges* to other nucleids
that is at the 'inside' of the nuc
on the other hand
there are Protons that are connected
by only **one** of their edges
while the other edge remains free of
a connection (to another proton or neutron)
now go to the beginning of the abstract
and see there the
'chain of orbitals' idea
described on the Alpha particle
it shoes that the electron is connected
linearily by some 'medium orbitals-
to the nucleus
ie
if a proton is connected in both of its sides
in the nuc
th electron is cut off because of that
inner connection (in the nuc)
and now you get
why is it that
***not every Proton in the nuc-has an elecron at its edge
and similarly
Neutrons that are inerly connected
loos some of its sub constituents !!!
and that fits and compatible exactly
to the new finding of the Op resarch
mentioned by the Op post !!!
(protons and neutrons as 'free floating'
are somewhat different from those
inside the nuc
my model actually goes even much further
and more detailed !!
as you can see from that example Iron scheme
(that is there many years ago
while we heard about the above new findings only yesterday !!!)
iow my findigs were done completely independent of those new findigs
it is a cross verification to both findigs )
it makes a new distraction even between
neotrons and protons in the nuc
those withjust one side connected
and those
with two sidea connected !!!
and as i said
you can 'see' them as lying on the palm of your hand
and it is there for many years
if that is not news for science
i dont know what is news .......
TIA
Y.Porat
-----------------------
Ace0f_5pades
>
> - Show quoted text -
lol, I do think its revolutionary but
the idea needs some debate mate, since mathematically, it is a charge
violation.
I avoided the issue in my modelling, by relying on the Argand plane
and a simple shifting of the directrix, then it becomes an individual
consideration for each mapping.
however to avoid the mathematical violation (since it simply will not
work in an argand plane -one would have to design a new plane... )
having looked at your site, I like what you've done. a break from
the traditional thinking of clustering protons, and neutrons, which
would probably make spin calculation a hell of a lot simpler -as a
space consideration plus other things I can think of. It also brings
to the foreground a debate on the strong nuclear force... since
structuring must feature in accordance. i.e. the assumption of
clustering to some extent, denies the repel charges? what if any
shielding effect does the neutrons have?
I will have to spend a bit more time going over what you've done there
Y.Porat
thank you fo r your positive assent
do you know-
at the deep and too long dead end of these issues
thinking people must understand that
there is something big missing there
(i could even say something rotten there !!
not just scientifically but i would say
about the social behaviour:
private interests money jobs etc etc
may be a lot of dishonesty.....admitting
that something is wrotten there
something reminding the
cleargy of 500 years ago- while the sun was orbiting the earth
and anyone saying something else
was burned on the stake !!)
so here at last
comes new obervations that cannot be denyed
(by cleaverand honest people)
now youare wrong by thinking as all common parrots
that there is there a vioaltion of chrge conservation!
as i explained (and was detected experimentally) that
THE PROTON AS A FREE APRTICLE
IS NOT AS IT IS INSIDE THE NUC !!
andonce you realise it
a new world is opened
**for new thinking*
btw
please note that
while experiments are causing a potential
earth quake in science
all the parrots keep quite
and preffere to ignore it
on the other hand if it was compatible to he
paradigm all of them woulf jump joyfully
with big rrumpets and chest drumming
please note
the above phenomenon
*was completely not expected by the
existing theories !!!!!
in contarst to the common pompous pose that
'* *every thing in QM is under control ***'''
(while such a phenomenon should light up
many 'red lights' or alarm to shake the smugness pose !!)
----------------
----------
which
> would probably make spin calculation a hell of a lot simpler -as a
> space consideration plus other things I can think of. It also brings
> to the foreground a debate on the strong nuclear force... since
> structuring must feature in accordance. i.e. the assumption of
> clustering to some extent, denies the repel charges? what if any
> shielding effect does the neutrons have?
------------------
i dont think so
it is known that the strong force is
very short ranged!!
btw that in itself should open a new thinkong about
waht is any attraction force ??
that is why i suggested the Circlon idea
a very basic particle that moves naturally
in a closed circle
see about it at the appendix
2
i sugges tthat you keep on asking me questions
you cant understand it
without a long series of
questions and answers!!
btw
that model of mine wa sbuilt as well
by asking MYSELF ans endless pricess
of asking myself
questions and answers
andmind you
one of the greatest difficulties of mine by developing that model was
**to get ridd of some paradigms *
like the one about
one electron for one Proton (:-)
exctly the issue we met now !!!
but it seemsthat i overcome it by the revolutioanry
inevitable assumption that
the particles inside the nuc
are not all along
the same as free ones
iow
i predicted inevitably - because of some abstract thinking --
what was discovered experimentaly now ie many years later !!
3
please note my binding energies analysis ...
it is very important
those binging energies are actually
sub particles !!! (sub constituents of the
Protons and Neutrons !!!)
TIA
Y.Porat
-------------------------
Ace0f_5pades
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
I saw little evidence as to how you drew the conclusion of no charge
violation.
I have no problem with QCD, except perhaps the definition that Green
is primary... its not, but then thats only a name issue (but still
artistic integrity). However, if its more, then there may be issue
there.
I'm fairly confident that the calculations of the quantum physicists
are correct, and Gell's formation of Quarks have been verified. -as
far as I'm aware.
Y.Porat
--------------------------
see tabls 2 and 3 in my abstract
and try to understand their meaning
if youcant understand it
ask me questions about it
2
may be you dont know
QM didnt went much further than the light elements
while it comes to heavier elements
it is helpless
and i heard the 'excuses'
that it cannot go further into the heavy Atoms
'because of 'lack of enough computer pwerr"
which is ,of course, a silly cheating excuse !!
TIA
Y.Porat
-------------------------
TIA
Y.Porat
--------------------