what is mass as a opposition to acceleration in EM #170 New Physics #304 ATOM TOTALITY 5th ed

[Archimedes Plutonium]

Alright, let explain why this post at this time. Last night on Iowa
PBS was a program about a summary of CERN LHC on the Higgs particle. I
caught it in
about 3/4 of the show, but was curious about one line of thought the
speaker
raised. I do not know his name, but he had white hair and a full beard
of white
hair. Perhaps he was on a physics faculty of one of Iowa's
Universities, perhaps not. Anyway, let me get to the best part of his
talk.

He said words to the effect: that mass in physics is somewhat strange
in that it appears to be a parameter that seeks to hinder
acceleration. And this strangeness is what motivated Peter Higgs and 4
other scientists to independently look for this Higgs-field of
impedance to acceleration.

So, now, with the axioms of Physics as the Maxwell Equations add on
Lenz law and add on Dirac Equation. Let me see if I can derive a more
satisfactory answer for the strangeness of mass that does not look for
a Higgs-field. In other words, let me see if in the Maxwell Equations
themselves, from charges, whether they can deliver a concept of "mass"
which is impedance of
acceleration.

I think I can, and will be a beautiful proof that the Maxwell
Equations are the axioms of Physics and that we need never roam in
fantasy land for stupid and silly fields.

So the question is, can the Maxwell Equations + Lenz law + Dirac
Equation produce a parameter that we call and know of as mass?

In the Coulomb law, we have charge, not mass.

But in the Faraday law, we have a force law, a kinetic force law that
moves the electron charge in a closed loop wire.

Now I think I can get mass from charge in Faraday's law.

Notice that charge in Maxwell Equations and Dirac Equation have two
forms, one form is a tiny ball, and the other form is the uncollapsed
wavefunction of dots of probability.

So the difference between mass and charge is that the charge is always
collapsed wavefunction and never uncollapsed, whereas mass can be
either collapsed or uncollapsed.

So here we have charge more primary and basic than mass and we get
mass from charge by collapsing the wavefunction. In other words, we
get mass from charge by altering the geometry of mass. When mass is in
a dot wave cloud it is energy as in E=mcc. But when mass is in a lump
sum it is collapsed and in a closed geometry.

So here we definitely need the Dirac Equation in the Maxwell Equations
because with the Dirac Equation, that we have Space as energy and
Space
is the uncollapsed wavefunction. We get mass as a derivative, a
secondary
feature of charge.

So what Peter Higgs was chasing after in a Higgs-field, is nothing
more than that of making charge turned into mass.

Archimedes Plutonium
http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium/
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

[john]

On Feb 11, 3:44 pm, Archimedes Plutonium

> Archimedes Plutoniumhttp://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium/

> whole entire Universe is just one big atom
> where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

So, now we have a Higgs field- mediated by????
And an electric field- mediated by???
And a gravitational field- mediated by???
Good going guys!!!

john

[Archimedes Plutonium]

Hi John,

Earlier today I saw your post and answered it in Math Forum but am
repeating it below. Someone
delayed the mine above post from appearing and then someone added
newsgroups to my
post which I had not added myself, and then Google called to say I had
reached my limit of posts. So I went to Math Forum.

I answer your question below and your question helped me to consider
that of Charge versus Mass is that a proton or electron cannot have
both at the same time, much like a particle and wave in a Double Slit
Experiment with the Complementarity Principle saying you cannot have
both in a measure. So that when an electron is in a atom it is a
uncollapsed wavefunction and
has no charge but only mass, but when an electron is moving in a
closed loop wire of Faraday's Law that electron is collapsed and has
no mass but has a charge of -1. Sounds hard to believe,
but then again, consider the much harder to believe idea that a proton
or electron has both charge and mass simultaneously. Never before in
physics history has that belief been challenged
until now. And so I challenge it.

Here are my earlier posts to Math Forum after Google cut me off, due
to some rogue person adding newsgroups to my posts.



The Math Forum @ Drexel
Date: Feb 11, 2012 6:32 PM
Author: plutonium....@gmail.com
Subject: Re: what is mass as a opposition to acceleration in EM New
Physics ATOM TOTALITY 5th ed

Re: what is mass as a opposition to acceleration in EM #171 New
Physics #305 ATOM TOTALITY 5th ed

Someone is tampering with the newsgroups of my posts, for the origina
showed up after an
hour waiting,
and the followup went to a newsgroup that I never entered. The entire
house of Usenet
needs a cleaning up and cleaning out.

But let that not stop science.

The point I was making earlier today in post #170 New Physics, was
that
no Higgs particle nor Higgs mechanism is going to bring physics any
closer
to an understanding of the relationship of charge to mass. That is the
important
question, as to how charge relates to mass. So the question of a Higgs
particle is
goofball physics for it never brings us nearer to the understanding of
charge to mass.

Charge to Mass relationship is the important question.

Yes, mass is the impedance of acceleration, but the concept of
impedance comes
from EM force.

So if we make the Maxwell Equations + Lenz law + Dirac Equation the
axioms of physics
then, are we closer to a tie up link connection between charge and
mass? Of course we are,
in that charge then becomes the collapsed wavefunction whereas mass
can be either
collapsed or uncollapsed wavefunction and that means charge can derive
mass.

So that means the Higgs particle was fantasy land, aimlessly flailing
about without sense
or purpose.

Physics has only three particles, 6 if we count their antiparticle:
electron, photon, and proton.

Two of them have charge and have mass, so that tells us something
right away, that mass
and charge are intertwined as one, and what we need to understand is
how one moves into
the other. Not this wastrel nonsense of Higgs particle.

Archimedes Plutonium

http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium/
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

The Math Forum @ Drexel
Date: Feb 11, 2012 6:38 PM
Author: plutonium....@gmail.com
Subject: Re: what is mass as a opposition to acceleration in EM #170
New Physics #304 ATOM TOTALITY 5th ed

(snipped)

>
> So, now we have a Higgs field- mediated by????
> And an electric field- mediated by???
> And a gravitational field- mediated by???
> Good going guys!!!
>
> john

#172 New Physics and #306 Atom Totality

Well, tell me, did you ever want a unification of forces of physics?
If so, then one particle has to be the mediator and thus the photon
since all
the forces are now an EM force.

So if you want a unification, then start acting as if there is a
unification with a unifier mediating particle. And do not go running
off chasing phantasies like a Higgs nonsense particle.

Now another poster asked this:


On Feb 11, 4:22 pm, someone wrote:
>
> Are electrons bound to atoms in shells or as uncollapsed particles?

That is the interface between charge as mass and mass as charge

Archimedes Plutonium

[Archimedes Plutonium]

On Feb 12, 1:04 am, Archimedes Plutonium
<plutonium.archime...@gmail.com> wrote:
(snipped)

>
> I answer your question below and your question helped me to consider
> that of Charge versus Mass is that a proton or electron cannot have
> both at the same time, much like a particle and wave in a Double Slit
> Experiment with the Complementarity Principle saying you cannot have
> both in a measure. So that when an electron is in a atom it is a
> uncollapsed wavefunction and
> has no charge but only mass, but when an electron is moving in a
> closed loop wire of Faraday's Law that electron is collapsed and has
> no mass but has a charge of -1. Sounds hard to believe,
> but then again, consider the much harder to believe idea that a proton
> or electron has both charge and mass simultaneously. Never before in
> physics history has that belief been challenged
> until now. And so I challenge it.
>

(snipped)

>
> > Are electrons bound to atoms in shells or as uncollapsed particles?
>
> That is the interface between charge as mass and mass as charge
>

Let me talk some more about the above for it is difficult to grasp,
even
those in physics. In the Double Slit Experiment what we learn is that
a
electron is both a particle and a wave, but when we measure it, it
comes
fully as one and not the other. It comes either as 100% wave or either
as
100% particle.

Now the reason duality is incomprehensible to human minds is the same
reason that it is incomprehensible that a plutonium atom held in one's
hand
is the same as the total Universe which is a plutonium atom. In other
words
scale is all lost. Science and physics are far above what the human
mind
can understand and comprehend, and so we make piecemeal progress, in
understanding a little piece at a time. We come to understand that a
electron
is a particle and a wave but when we measure it, it is not both at
once but only
one of them at once.

Now we have electrons with a mass of 0.5 MeV and a charge of -1. In
Old Physics
we assumed an electron always had both a charge of -1 and a mass of
0.5MeV simultaneously
in every measurement. Likewise we assumed a proton had a mass of 938
MeV and a
charge of +1 simultaneously. But why should we believe that to be the
case when an electron
in measure is either 100% particle with 0% wave or 100% wave with 0%
particle?

We should not carry that hideous assumption into physics, but rather,
like particle wave
duality think of charge as a form of mass and that when an electron is
inside a atom it has
no charge only mass and when outside the atom it has charge but no
mass.

Now does that make any difference to Physics in general? It makes a
huge difference because now we explain how particles gain mass and not
be some fantasy fairy tale of a Higgs mechanism field. That mass is
just form of charge inside an atom and outside the atom, the mass is
charge.

It also means that mass-gravity of Newton and General Relativity are
bunk, and that gravity
is only the charge differential between two bodies in motion as
Faraday's law.