Reverse the Polarity of the Neutron Flow Explained?
Douglas B. Killings
For years I have had a hypothesis regarding the Doctor's oft
repeated conundrum "reverse the polarity of the neutron flow".
Recently, while thumbing through some science magazines and
talking with some friends who work at the Fermilab National
Particle Accelerator Laboratory in Batavia, Illinois, I have
found some evidence to support this supposition. What follows
here is a brief outline of my explanation, which I here submit
for your comment. Don't quite know what use this might be put
to, but it does seem to me to be an interesting thought
experiment.
First, let me take a step back for a moment and delve into some
of our modern understandings of particle physics. Despite what
many of us were taught in school, most of the sub-atomic
particles that are considered to be basic (i.e., protons,
neutrons) are not basic at all, but are themselves composed of
still smaller particles called Quarks. At present we know of six
quarks and their anti- counterparts. These particles are called
Up, Down, Charm, Strange, Top and Bottom. For example, Protons
are composed of 2 Up quarks and 1 Down (uud); Neutrons have 1 Up
and 2 Down (udd). Other particles have other combinations of
these quarks, some in combination with their anti-quark
counterparts. Particles such as Electrons and Neutrinos are
members of the Lepton family, which is related to the Quark
family and hence are not made up of quarks.
What is important to understand in this discussion is that the
quarks themselves have polarity. A fractional polarity, but
polarity nevertheless. Up, Charm, and Top all have a positive
(+) 2/3 charge, while Down, Strange, and Bottom all have a
negative (-) 1/3 charge. Stable particles can only occur when a
combination of quarks are configured so as to equal a whole
charge. Thus, two +2/3 Up and one -1/3 Down equals one Proton
with a whole charge of +1. As mentioned above, a Neutron is
composed of one +2/3 Up and two -1/3 Down, giving it a net of no
charge.
But here is the kicker. According to recent experiments at
Fermilab and CERN in Geneva Switzerland, Neutrons start to adopt
some odd behaviors when they are subjected to extreme conditions.
By extreme, I am talking about conditions equivalent to that
found in a neutron star. In a neutron star, the temperature and
pressure is so great that Protons (+1) and Electrons (-1) are
forced together into forming Neutrons (0), simply because there
is no other room. Now, as the pressure and temperatures increase
above this point, the Neutrons themselves start to crack. When
this happens, we start to see Neutrons exhibit behavior roughly
equivalent to _that attributable to a particle with a charge_.
What evidently happens is this: under this circumstance of
extreme temperatures and pressures, a Neutron may loose one of
its constituent Quarks. At this point, the Neutron becomes
polarized, either with a +1/3 charge (if it loses one of the Down
Quarks) or a -2/3 charge (if it loses the Up Quark). But here is
the important point: despite this lose of a Quark, the particle
will still retain all or most of the properties and behavior
associated with Neutrons. It will _still be a Neutron_, albeit a
Neutron with a charge, polarity, and the capability of being
conductive. An analogy in physics would probably be an ionized
gas, i.e. a gas such as Oxygen that has had one or more Electrons
stripped from each atom, giving the atoms an electric charge.
Thus, when the Doctor "reverses the polarity of the Neutron
flow", what he has in fact done (under this scenario) is to
modify the flow of +1/3 and/or -2/3 Neutrons, either by switching
the electro-magnetic charges around (probably the most likely
explanation) or possibly even by changing or replacing Down and
Up Quarks in the appropriate ratios. What this would imply for
the level of, say, Timelord/Gallifreyan technology would be
staggering; we are after all talking about energy levels of near
unprecedented proportions, all of which must be somehow contained
before it could ever be utilized (to give a rough idea, a mere
tablespoon of Neutron Star soup would contain enough raw energy
to fuel all of our energy needs for a decade).
To be sure, there are many problems with this hypothesis. To
begin with, such charged Neutrons would heavily imply the
existence of "naked" (i.e. free, unattached) Quarks, something
which has yet to be observed. More objectionable from an
engineering standpoint is the fact that Neutrons of this variety
would -- like ionized gas -- be relatively unstable; half-lives
would probably be measured in the millionths of a second, an
eternity at the level of sub-atomic particle physics, but far
from a level of stability lending itself to practical use.
Again, if Timelord technology has found a way to stabilize the
decay of +1/3 and -2/3 Neutrons over long periods of time, or
even to hold them in stasis, the mere fact of their being able to
do so would speak volumes for their level of technological
sophistication.
As for the near-miraculous properties Neutron flows (and
especially polarity-reversed Neutron flows) are alleged to have,
I will leave that for others to discuss and decipher.
Interestingly enough, this line of experimentation has also led
to some experiments involving explorations in temporal physics.
Scientists in Grenoble, France working at the other end of the
temperature spectrum (near absolute-zero) are attempting to
measure Electric Dipole Moments (EDMs) in Neutrons, in an effort
to detect and observe evidence of extremely localized time
reversal phenomena. Nothing as yet has been directly observed,
but evidence does point to the existence of such phenomena as
occurring (or at least, observable) at very low temperatures.
The existence of Neutron EDMs would also point toward the
existence of polarized Neutrons, and hence toward Neutrons that
are charged due to the loss of one Quark.
So... does anyone else have any ideas to add to this?
--
Douglas B. Killings,
Video Czar, ChiCon 2000 (58th WorldCon)
DeTr...@EnterAct.Com
Do...@Pronetsolutions.Com
Fanfiction Website:
http://www.enteract.com/~detroyes/teotp/teotp.html
"Any fool can walk on water if the world is cold
enough."
Corey Klemow
> quarks and their anti- counterparts. These particles are called
> Up, Down, Charm, Strange, Top and Bottom. For example, Protons
> are composed of 2 Up quarks and 1 Down (uud); Neutrons have 1 Up
> and 2 Down (udd).
So -- a few months after the debut of an actual "Megabyte Modem", you're
telling us that "One up, one down... one Strange Matter" actually *means
something*?
The apocalypse is coming... a world defined by Pip'n'Jane... everyone
using verbiage that is apposite -- yet over-magnanimously loquacious --
and ascribing seemingly nonsensical attributes to scientific-sounding
statements that later are revealed to be true...
Innocet
<CKl...@compuserve.com> wrote:
>"Douglas B. Killings" wrote:
>
>> quarks and their anti- counterparts. These particles are called
>> Up, Down, Charm, Strange, Top and Bottom. For example, Protons
>> are composed of 2 Up quarks and 1 Down (uud); Neutrons have 1 Up
>> and 2 Down (udd).
>
>So -- a few months after the debut of an actual "Megabyte Modem", you're
>telling us that "One up, one down... one Strange Matter" actually *means
>something*?
>
>The apocalypse is coming... a world defined by Pip'n'Jane... everyone
>using verbiage that is apposite -- yet over-magnanimously loquacious --
>and ascribing seemingly nonsensical attributes to scientific-sounding
>statements that later are revealed to be true...
>
>coreY
>CKl...@compuserve.com
>
Luckily I recognised strange matter & quarks from high school
chemistry class - I was a Junior when 7Doc eps were being run on the
local PBS.
I found it a refreshingly nice touch that Pip & Jane had at least
*some* scientific reality in "Time and the Rani," instead of
technobabble fueling the Rani's "dangerous" experiments.
Thanks, Doug, for the interesting reading there.
Innocet
Stephen Graves
Corey Klemow wrote in message <37D4006B...@compuserve.com>...
>The apocalypse is coming... a world defined by Pip'n'Jane... everyone
>using verbiage that is apposite -- yet over-magnanimously loquacious --
>and ascribing seemingly nonsensical attributes to scientific-sounding
>statements that later are revealed to be true...
"There is nothing you can do to prevent the catharsis of spurious morality!"
SG
Douglas B. Killings
> So -- a few months after the debut of an actual "Megabyte Modem", you're
> telling us that "One up, one down... one Strange Matter" actually *means
> something*?
Uh huh. "Strange Matter" is a tagline used by phyicists to describe exotic
particles using the Up-Down-Strange (uds) model. These would be Baryons
that are charged neutrally (and therefore related to Neutrons) but are more
massive than standard Neutrons (the Strange quark being more massive than
either the Up or Down Quark). Also, it is theoretically possible to create
particles using the uds model that utilyze more than three quarks. For
instance, an Up-Up-Down-Strange particle with an overal charge of +1 is
theoretically possible. Such a particle would be classified as "Strange
Matter".
Pip and Jane seemed to have had a clue, but I will venture to say that they
probably couldn't make a case.
Charles Christopher Hart
On Mon, 6 Sep 1999, Douglas B. Killings wrote:
> This is what happens when a geek watches too much Doctor Who.
>
> For years I have had a hypothesis regarding the Doctor's oft
> repeated conundrum "reverse the polarity of the neutron flow".
(Volumes of information that soars well above my head snipped.)
> So... does anyone else have any ideas to add to this?
Sweet merciful ape-shit, man. And I thought -I- was obsessive. With all
due respect to your obvious knoweldge, I've sent this to my girlfriend,
who fears I am far to preoccupied with Doctor Who. Perhaps she will now
concede that I am, after all, not the world's greatest sad fanboy. But
then, doesn't the very fact that I have a girlfriend assure that?
By the way, if Pertwee only said "Reverse the polarity of the neutron
flow" once during his tenure as the Doctor, and then again in the Five
Doctors, where did it gain such a fan following. It seems that by the time
Davison was the Doctor, he made a reference to it more than once, In
"Castrovalva(?)" and in "Mawdryn Undead," it must have become a popular
fan joke by then. Was it a popular story Pertwee related at conventions?
C. Christopher Hart
who still needs the CVE explained to him.
Douglas B. Killings
> Sweet merciful ape-shit, man. And I thought -I- was obsessive. With all
> due respect to your obvious knoweldge, I've sent this to my girlfriend,
> who fears I am far to preoccupied with Doctor Who. Perhaps she will now
> concede that I am, after all, not the world's greatest sad fanboy. But
> then, doesn't the very fact that I have a girlfriend assure that?
Hmmm... Does the very fact that I have a wife, a child, and a mortgage assure
me exemption from sad fanboy status? :-)
Alot of this came from the fact that I like to freely associate ideas and see
where they lead me. OK, sometimes its to Purgatory, but still...
> C. Christopher Hart
> who still needs the CVE explained to him.
Cheap Visual Effect?
The Clown
wrote:
>Luckily I recognised strange matter & quarks from high school
>chemistry class - I was a Junior when 7Doc eps were being run on the
>local PBS.
Geez, chemistry's gone downhill since then, I guess. I just had it
last year and we barely touched on quantum numbers, let alone quarks.
>I found it a refreshingly nice touch that Pip & Jane had at least
>*some* scientific reality in "Time and the Rani," instead of
>technobabble fueling the Rani's "dangerous" experiments.
Or it could've stuck like a thore sumb amongst all the running
around and rayon cloaks...
--
Tyler "The Clown" Dion E-mail: clo...@sprynet.com
Proudly endorsing the use of casual sex as a means to avert
war since about five minutes ago.
Simon Brown
> Hmmm... Does the very fact that I have a wife, a child, and a mortgage
assure
> me exemption from sad fanboy status? :-)
>
Wife and child don't really mean a lot...in this weird world of ours,
stranger things have happened. However, the fact that you were able to save
a deposit and secure a mortgage makes you a god-like being indeed.
Simon
Iian Neill
> > C. Christopher Hart
> > who still needs the CVE explained to him.
My knowledge of sub-atomic physics is just about comparable to
Christopher Columbus's understanding of a particle accelerator, but
doesn't the CVE stand for "charged vacuum emboitment"? Now, an
emboitment sounds postively hernia-inducing, but as for charged vacuum,
I've heard somewhere that it's the theory that itty-bitty bits of matter
are creating and destroying themselves on the sub-atomic level nearly
instantaneously. Therefore, this "quantum foam" of space is an ideal
gateway to another universe. How that follows I do not quite know, but
saying it with certainty makes me feel a hell of a lot better.
Hoping to broaden his horizons,
Iian Neill.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Dangermouse
So, who gets to quote this in a JonDoc book?
--
"This path has been placed before you; the choice to take it is yours
alone"
http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Mansion/4845/
David Herrick
> By the way, if Pertwee only said "Reverse the polarity of the neutron
> flow" once during his tenure as the Doctor, and then again in the Five
> Doctors, where did it gain such a fan following. It seems that by the
> time Davison was the Doctor, he made a reference to it more than once,
> In "Castrovalva(?)" and in "Mawdryn Undead," it must have become a
> popular fan joke by then. Was it a popular story Pertwee related at
> conventions?
I seem to recall that he "reversed the polarity" quite a few times,
without specifying what he was was reversing the polarity of. But yes,
I think he did only go all the way with the neutron flow once. Shame he
couldn't keep a straight face when saying the line in "The Five
Doctors". Was it "The Sea Devils" he first did it in? I can't remember
clearly now.
Dave
Alan S. Wales
>Corey Klemow wrote:
>
>> So -- a few months after the debut of an actual "Megabyte Modem", you're
>> telling us that "One up, one down... one Strange Matter" actually *means
>> something*?
>
>Uh huh. "Strange Matter" is a tagline used by phyicists to describe exotic
>particles using the Up-Down-Strange (uds) model. These would be Baryons
>that are charged neutrally (and therefore related to Neutrons) but are more
>massive than standard Neutrons (the Strange quark being more massive than
>either the Up or Down Quark). Also, it is theoretically possible to create
>particles using the uds model that utilyze more than three quarks. For
>instance, an Up-Up-Down-Strange particle with an overal charge of +1 is
>theoretically possible. Such a particle would be classified as "Strange
>Matter".
>
>Pip and Jane seemed to have had a clue, but I will venture to say that they
>probably couldn't make a case.
Yes. I remember in the mid-to-late 80's strange matter was the physics theory
du jour, only to be replaced by the universal string theory and now missing
mass. I'm sure missing mass has been superseded by another theory--I could be
way behind in what's fashionable in theoretical physics as I've been out of the
business for 10 years.
Unlike most fans who deride Time and the Rani, I was quite impressed that the
show made reference to strange matter (no matter how convoluted it was...)
And wasn't "reverse the polarity of the neutron flow" said by Troughton's
doctor more often than Pertwee's?
"Quantum Physics: The dreams stuff are made of."
Azaxyr
>Yes. I remember in the mid-to-late 80's strange matter was the physics theory
>du jour, only to be replaced by the universal string theory and now missing
>mass.
Ooh, yes, that's a good theroy.
"See, there's this mass, but you see it's
*missing*, so there's no way you can
disprove my theory you bastards! Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!"
"All these worlds....
...Will make excellent sites for our garbage dumps."
Daniel Frankham
<chr...@gladstone.uoregon.edu> wrote:
>By the way, if Pertwee only said "Reverse the polarity of the neutron
>flow" once during his tenure as the Doctor, and then again in the Five
>Doctors, where did it gain such a fan following. It seems that by the time
>Davison was the Doctor, he made a reference to it more than once, In
>"Castrovalva(?)" and in "Mawdryn Undead," it must have become a popular
>fan joke by then. Was it a popular story Pertwee related at conventions?
I thought the Peter Haining "Celebration" book was responsible. ISTR
Dicks (or was it Barry Letts?) jokingly says that whenever they needed
a technobabble explanation they just inserted "reverse the polarity of
the neutron flow" into the script.
>C. Christopher Hart
>who still needs the CVE explained to him.
CVE, n.
1. a Charged Vacuum Emboitiment. A gateway between two universes,
allowing the passage of information and matter from one to the other,
created by the Logopolitans to extend the life of the Universe by
slowing down entropy. Charged, too, apparently.
2. "magic door"
--
Sir Oran Haut-ton
Cliff Bowman
>
> So, who gets to quote this in a JonDoc book?
>
>
Whoever gets there first?
Cheers,
Cliff Bowman
"Windows has detected movement of the mouse. Please reboot the computer
for the changes to take effect."
Why not pay my 3D Dr Who site a visit at http://www.who3d.cwc.net/
PS change "canyoupleasesendnospam" to "net"if replying via e-mail
Snarky
Corey Klemow wrote:
>
> "Douglas B. Killings" wrote:
>
> > quarks and their anti- counterparts. These particles are called
> > Up, Down, Charm, Strange, Top and Bottom. For example, Protons
> > are composed of 2 Up quarks and 1 Down (uud); Neutrons have 1 Up
> > and 2 Down (udd).
>
> So -- a few months after the debut of an actual "Megabyte Modem", you're
> telling us that "One up, one down... one Strange Matter" actually *means
> something*?
>
> The apocalypse is coming... a world defined by Pip'n'Jane... everyone
> using verbiage that is apposite -- yet over-magnanimously loquacious --
> and ascribing seemingly nonsensical attributes to scientific-sounding
> statements that later are revealed to be true...
>
> coreY
> CKl...@compuserve.com
No, it's actually just the catharsis of spurious modality ~ ~
/ o
^
v
Snarky <feeto...@home.com>
(queer as fuck and twice as strange;^>)
--
MZ