Create an account Home  ·  Topics  ·  Downloads  ·  Your Account  ·  Submit News  ·  Top 10  
Mission Statement

· Home
· Forum
· Special Sections
· Advertising
· AvantGo
· Books
· Downloads
· Events
· Feedback
· Link to us
· Private Messages
· Search
· Stories Archive
· Submit News
· Surveys
· Top 10
· Topics
· Web Links
· Your Account

Who's Online
There are currently, 297 guest(s) and 0 member(s) that are online.

You are Anonymous user. You can register for free by clicking here

  • (August 7, 2024 - August 11, 2024) 2024 ExtraOrdinary Technology Conference

  • Hot Links

    American Antigravity

    Closeminded Science


    ECW E-Cat World


    Integrity Research Institute

    New Energy Movement

    New Energy Times



    Science Hobbyist

    T. Bearden Mirror Site


    Want to Know

    Other Info-Sources
    NE News Sites
    E-Cat World
    NexusNewsfeed ZPE
    NE Discussion Groups
    Energetic Forum
    Energy Science Forum
    Free_Energy FB Group
    The KeelyNet Blog
    OverUnity Research
    Tesla Science Foundation (FB)
    Vortex (old Interact)
    Magazine Sites
    Electrifying Times (FB)
    ExtraOrdinary Technology
    IE Magazine
    New Energy Times

    Interesting Links

    Click Here for the DISCLOSURE PROJECT
    SciTech Daily Review
    NEXUS Magazine

    LHC experiments may lead to New Physics
    Posted on Friday, November 18, 2011 @ 20:32:33 GMT by vlad

    Science WGUGLINSKI writes: Researchers from Large Hadron Collider (LHC) have shown such results, which are out of our current understanding of the Physics. These conclusions are leading to the “new physics”.

    Matthew Charles, LHC-beauty (LHCb) told HCP 2011 meeting on Monday that D-mesons are found to decay in a slightly different manner than the antiparticles of mesons. The researchers found a difference of about 0.8% that is a significant one. This conclusion may help to explain why antimatter is present in lesser amount than the amount of matter in the universe. However, according to experts, further research is required in this respect.


    It's interesting to note that physicists need to make experiments in the LHC, so that to arrive to the conclusion that there is need a New Physics, only because now the LHC experiments are showing that D-mesons do not follow what we expect from the Standard Model.

    Several particles do not follow what the Standard Model predicts, and the neutron is among them.  For instance, look at this page in the Wikipedia:

    "The Standard Model of particle physics predicts a tiny separation of positive and negative charge within the neutron leading to a permanent electric dipole moment.[9] The predicted value is, however, well below the current sensitivity of experiments. From several unsolved puzzles in particle physics, it is clear that the Standard Model is not the final and full description of all particles and their interactions"

    It is obvious that the quark structure [d,u,d] of Particle Physics is wrong.  From such quark structure, the neutron's decay would have to have a time decay in the order of 10^-23 seconds, which is the order of the decay occurred by the strong force (because it is formed by quarks, according to Particle Physics).
    However the neutron's time decay is 15 minutes.  I said 15... minutes !!!!

    Such time decay of the neutron is compatible with a neutron model formed by proton+electron (when the electron is captured by the proton and they form a neutron, the electron loses its spin, a phenomenon named spin-fusion in Quantum Ring Theory).

    Other particles also have a fermion in their structure, according to QRT.

    For instance:

    - the neutral meson pi has a quark structure [d,d'] .
    - the positive meson pi+  has a structure [d,e',d'] , where e' is the positron
    - the negative meson pi-  has a structure [d,e,d'], where e is the electron

    Because of the spin-fusion, the mesons pi+ and pi- have spin zero, because the positron and the electron lose their spin within the structure of mesons.

    Several properties of the mesons (and other particles) do not fit to what we expect from the predictions of the Standard Model.

    And the reason is obvious: it's because the spin-fusion is not considered in the Standard Model.

    It's is also easy to understand that the existence of leptons within the structure of several particles is responsible for some differences in the behavior of the particle and the antiparticle, as the LHC is showing

    But in spite of so many fails, incompressibly the physicists now hope that LHC will give them evidences on why there is no antimatter in the Universe.

    Well, it seems the reason why there is no antimatter in the Universe is obvious:  there must be some assymetry in the fundamental structure of the Universe.

    But it's impossible to find such assymetry from the fundamental structure of the Universe proposed in Particle Physics.

    The physicits suppose that several particles participate in the formation of the fundamental matter.  For instance, they believe that the boson W participates in the weak interaction, and they explain the neutron's decay by considering the participation of the boson W.  And they believe it just because the boson W was predicted, and later detected by experiments.

    But what is the true meaning of the detection of particles predicted in the Standard Model? Let's see it.

    Suppose that you have a brick in your hand, and you want to throw it against the floor, so that to crash it in several pieces. Can you predict the size of the several pieces ?

    Of course you cannot.

    And now consider the collision of two protons, so that they crash in several smaller particles. Can you predict the size and the characteristics of the particles ?

    Yes, you can. 

    Because the particles have several properties as mass, charge, spin, baryon number, parity, etc.  And there are some rules for the formation of the particles.  Such rules were discovered by the particle theorists.
    So, it's possible to predict successfully the particles resulted from the collision of two protons.
    But such successful prediction does not mean that those particles have participation in the formation of the structure of matter in the Universe.

    The fundamental structure of the universe is formed by proton and electron, as follows:

    - The aether is formed by massless particles:  electric particles (+) and (-), magnetic particles (+) and (-), permeability particles p(+) and p(-), attractive gravitons g(+) and g(-), repulsive gravitons G(+) and G(-).
    - The massles particles form quarks
    - And the quarks form the electron and the proton.

    All the other particles are only breaking up of collisions.  They do not contribute for the structure of the Universe.

    As said, the explanation on the reason why antimatter does not exist in the Universe requires an antissymetry in its structure.

    It's possible the antisymmetry existiing in the Universe's structure is due to the repulsive gravity.
    In Quantum Ring Theory is proposed that there is a small difference between the force of interactions due to the gravitons g and the gravitons G. 

    Also, in QRT is considered that gravitons g and G have interaction with the same magnitude of the electromagnetism. Besides, in QRT it's proposed that strong force is not a fundamental force of nature.  In QRT it is proposed that strong force is actually only a special kind of gravity (dynamic gravity).

    So, an assymetry in the structure of the gravity can have influence in the agglutination of the quarks, according to QRT.

    But such hypothesis is IMPOSSIBLE in Particle Physics, because according to current theories the force of gravity interaction is 10^38 times weaker than that of the electromagnetism, and 10^40 times weaker than that of the strong force.

    Therefore, according to the Standard Model, the gravity cannot have any influence in the agglutination of quarks, and so gravity cannot be the answer why the antimatter does not exist in the Universe.

    Actually it seems to be impossible to explain why antimatter does not exist in the Universe from the foundations of the current theories.  And Matthew Charles, mentioned in the beggining of this article, is right:  there is need a New Physics.

    But of course such New Physics must consider an assymetry in the structure of the Universe.  If this assymetry will not be discovered, even the New Physics will not be able to explain why the antimatter does not exist in the Universe we live.



    Security Code: Security Code
    Type Security Code

    Don't have an account yet? You can create one. As a registered user you have some advantages like theme manager, comments configuration and post comments with your name.

    Related Links
    · More about Science
    · News by vlad

    Most read story about Science:
    100 miles on 4 ounces of water?

    Article Rating
    Average Score: 5
    Votes: 1

    Please take a second and vote for this article:

    Very Good


     Printer Friendly Printer Friendly

    "LHC experiments may lead to New Physics" | Login/Create an Account | 4 comments | Search Discussion
    The comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content.

    No Comments Allowed for Anonymous, please register

    Neutrino experiment repeat at Cern finds same result (Score: 1)
    by vlad on Saturday, November 19, 2011 @ 17:18:33 GMT
    (User Info | Send a Message) http://www.zpenergy.com
    BBC News - The team which found that neutrinos may travel faster than light has carried out an improved version of their experiment - and confirmed the result.

    Full article: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15791236 [www.bbc.co.uk]

    Read also: CERN Experiment Excludes 1 Error In Faster-Than-Light Finding [www.huffingtonpost.com]
    GENEVA — The chances have risen that Einstein was wrong about a fundamental law of the universe.

    Scientists at the world's biggest physics lab said Friday they have ruled out one possible error that could have distorted their startling measurements that appeared to show particles traveling faster than light.

    We don't need a 'new physics' - we need the 'old physics' (Score: 1)
    by Kadamose on Friday, November 18, 2011 @ 21:31:26 GMT
    (User Info | Send a Message)
    More specifically, we need to go back to the Aether physics model, and completely forget that the 20th century even existed.    The 20th century should be known as the century where mankind lost its way.  Afterall, there is a reason why the end of the 19th century is referred to as 'The end of the Age of Enlightenment' - many people forget this fact.


    All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2002-2016 by ZPEnergy. Disclaimer: No content, on or affiliated with ZPEnergy should be construed as or relied upon as investment advice. While every effort is made to ensure that the information contained on ZPEnergy is correct, the operators of ZPEnergy make no warranties as to its accuracy. In all respects visitors should seek independent verification and investment advice.
    Keywords: ZPE, ZPF, Zero Point Energy, Zero Point Fluctuations, ZPEnergy, New Energy Technology, Small Scale Implementation, Energy Storage Technology, Space-Energy, Space Energy, Natural Potential, Investors, Investing, Vacuum Energy, Electromagnetic, Over Unity, Overunity, Over-Unity, Free Energy, Free-Energy, Ether, Aether, Cold Fusion, Cold-Fusion, Fuel Cell, Quantum Mechanics, Van der Waals, Casimir, Advanced Physics, Vibrations, Advanced Energy Conversion, Rotational Magnetics, Vortex Mechanics, Rotational Electromagnetics, Earth Electromagnetics, Gyroscopes, Gyroscopic Effects

    PHP-Nuke Copyright © 2005 by Francisco Burzi. This is free software, and you may redistribute it under the GPL. PHP-Nuke comes with absolutely no warranty, for details, see the license.