Now, above I said one helicity of the e-, c+ would be preferred. If we section one of these tori and make flow lines

El — Sectioned basics» of spacc in the fire fluid around a center we may see why. We assume that the tori can have a maximum velocity relative to the basics of spacc of 2c (in the same sense that accelerated electrons encounter the 2°7 blackbody radiation at near 2c). Hut now we must differ, for I assume that not only is this important but that it is all that is important to inertia and mass: As the electron's velocity increases into the basic flux the fluid stuff near outside of torus must meet the basics at in increasingly higher rate than does the fluid near the hole. I am assuming a torus which flics forward face on. So the center of the flow must move ever inward to keep the fluid flowing at c. If enough energy were available (an infinite amount?) this centcr

The tori would prefer one helicity for the reason that, in sectional view the hatched, the outer portion contains a greater volumn. And least action would prefer that the greater and slower flow impact the basics; the lesser flow makes up for this in speed up to near 2c6.

A final question should be this do large multiples of these components exist inside the more massive elementary particles as separate entities?

It appears unnecessary in all cases sincc the repression of the center flow in the closed tori -- by accelerating into the basic flux — and the increase in D, decrease in d, of th e broken tori is the equivalent of having mass added on, where D and d are the two diameters of a torus as used conventionally. By this the scattering cross section of neutrino interactions should increase as energy goes up, that of the electron, decrease.

I have said above that one could construct "elementary" particles with only "two" torus-like components, of specified internal spins and flows.

Therein I made statements to effect that one could seetheexperimenially-cotifirnied properties of the particles by picturing these a.s made of the tori components. 1 mentioned a few.7,8,9

Now 1 should like to show that parity violation was no violation at all, but a misinterpretation, a confused view. The confusion was partially, at least, caused by one's having pictured the particle's spin as either "pointing forward," right hand, or, "backward," left hand. Arrows pointing opposite to the direction of the particle's linear movement arc not only misleading but are one dimensional affairs; whereas, we need arrows showing movement in three dimensions (arrows pointing with the direction tell little more). It is small wonder that in viewing the beta decay of Co60 in terms of the conventional arrows we should ascribe to the mirror an impossible event.10," Convenient mathematical fictions can cause trouble. In terms of the traced movements and helices of our tori there are not only no "impossible" mirrored events but the events as mirrored are the requisite antiparticles. (When we have no translatory movement we must yet picture spin and flow — but not helicity.)

Let us use mirrors.

Sectioned Components


Saving Power, Saving The World

Saving Power, Saving The World

Get All The Support And Guidance You Need To Be A Success At Helping Save Power. This Book Is One Of The Most Valuable Resources In The World When It Comes To How To Use Renewable Energy As Your Alternative Power Suppliers.

Get My Free Ebook

Post a comment