Trans mit'


spin and an cr~ must show opposite, i.e.. inside to forward flow.

The mirror views of these two are the two helices of the c+. The flow center configuration should prohibit the e" from remaining right handed. If it is started out from a composite as right handed it should flip immediately, reacting against the basics of space, and conversely, the c*.

Images of the above eL"> eR" become eR=, e^"



Mirror Images eR~

If wc show the more complex proton, its mirror-image will likewise be its anti-particle.

Because of the flow — and impingement of basics of space against this flow (maximum relative of 2c) — there is a preferred helicity of the electron. If, therefore the electron is treated with a magnetic field10,11 the electrons will assume orientations which will preferentially, at unstable particle decay, fly off in predetermined directions, consider a mirror view of tt and /v decays:

netic basic flux hitting the components of Co60 will tend to cause the outside flow of the unbroken tori (within the Co60) to face into a helically aligned flux "wind" (electromagnetic field) — exactly as when the tori are accelerated. This aligning of the tori (since they do not flip except under special conditions of breakup of composite) is that which aligns the whole:10

Magnetically aligned basic flux d -ojul eL~

Spin alignment symbolized

When these electrons are "shot" out they are shot out so that the outside flow heads into the flux. This repression of the flow center is inertia; when any weak spot (or hole) in the impinging flux passes by, the component,

7r spin 0 Mirror

7r+ spin 0

7r spin 0 Mirror at breakup

at breakup

7r+ spin 0

All internal movements are reversed by the mirror; therefore the images are the antipar-licles. Since w has spin 0 and the ¿r has spin 1/2 we must assume that when the tt breaks up into a yr and an V/j the e~ flips over from a state of left spin to one of right spin; this allows the V/j and fr to fly apart with the right hand helicity. The flip takes time, slowing the reaction. Nevertheless, except to preserve angular momentum when the need arises, the flow pattern of the e~ should make it left handed.

Finally, if we align a composite particle by using an electro-magnetic "field" (our helically aligned space basics) as Mrs. Wu and associates did with the Co60 nucleii12 we thereby align the composite in a preferential way since the individual components are all that offers a resistance to our spin aligned basics, indeed, all that there is to any particle. All should pretty much agree w ith that. Now, the important thing is this: the mag the e-, must shoot out — the steam is up, and throttle is open. The chuck is removed.13

What of charge, of the so-called TCP theorem? We have treated it above, already; for when we treat spin, flow, and helicity (through the basics) we have simultaneously treated charge. Charge is the twist given the basics by spin and flow. It is then small wonder that "weak interactions always obey charge-conjugation invariance and parity invariance taken together". They arc inseparable. The parity (true parity) determines the charge.14

And we treat not just charge-conjugation invariance and space-inversion invariance, or parity, but, at once, time-reversal invariance. For when we allow that any parity experiment must see all internal constituents and their several movements — and without this allowance we are hobbled, have bl inders on — we at once see that no ex périment, including "thought" experiments, can claim that the principle of time reversal is anything but invalid: we can start at the macro level, using the illustration of a swimmer moving backward in time (a favorite of the time-reversal-/« principle-crowd). As the swimmer moves forward in time we see, by close scrutiny, that there is a reaction between the water and the swimmer's feet and hands. But in the backwards view - -- and we must see all - - the water molecules rush up aginst the swimmer's hands and feet, stop dead, causing no reaction; instead the swimmer moves back along the path from which the water came. Action-reaction is violated, Newton's third law of motion.

Let's go to the very small: we have a zr+ moving through a magnetic field, the magnet has poles, and marked N and S; the magnetic field is of such a direction, say, that from our vantage point the 7r+ curves to the left (a tt will curve to the right). If we run a film of the event backwards the 7r+ will be seen to curve right, an impossible n+ in our magnetic field. Ah! but let the camera reverse left for right. Now our 7r+ curves left again. But perversity has us, for when our camera changed left for right it also changed all the internal spins and flows of the 7r+. And this changed particle is a tt. A tt should curve to the right, not left. But wait! did our camera not also interchange the north and south poles by reversing the spin of spin-alligned basics traversing the space between poles (despite the now phony fact that the south is imprinted N, the north, S), reversing our field? Indeed. Now we have the tt+ curving left, well enough, but since our magnetic field is reversed, it should now curve right, not left. Therefore time reversal is impossible. When we have allowed ourselves the abilties to see the spin and substructures of all components of a particle we see that we have changed a particle into its antiparticle, we now have a zr curving correctly in a reversed field, but we have not run the tt+ backward in time. All such experiments with micro (as with macro) constituents fail if we are allowed analytical instruments, e.g., magnets in determining all parameters. Only if we disallow instruments showing charge (the curve), ionization, spin, momentum, etc., may we say: The most elementary particles can travel backwards in time — unfortunately we are hiding behind our ignorance. For when we allow total analysis, showing the known properties of particles, no example of time reversal is seen. Indeed since one can show that time reversal is impossible in the four simple basic particles (by our hypothesis), the electrons and neutrinos, due to its violating one or more of the known laws of nature and since (in our view, above) all matter is composed of these can we not conclude that time wersal is disallowed in all more complex ructures by existing laws of nature?15

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