Follow by Email

Wednesday, November 24, 2010

2 the structure of the field

18 Script 2

The questions then are this.  What shape would the field take and what precisely would be the type and kind of particles that make up the field?  Here the solution was found in a simple rule of correspondence.  In effect everything is the sum of it's parts.  Take any three dimensional object, be it a brick or a stick of wood - then what we see and measure of the object itself is simply a collection or congregation of atoms and molecules that that are somehow bound together to create the visible, identifiable object itself.  Break down the object, grind it down to its very smallest parts and we'd be left with a puddle of atoms that were previously assembled and bound into that shape.  In the same way the proposal is that we take our 'clues' from what is known of the magnetic field and build from there.

The first point is that the field seems to comprise what Faraday referred to as 'lines of force'.  In effect the proposal was that the magnetic field comprises lines that move from one side of a permanent magnet to the other side, north to south.  If the field comprises particles then these lines of force would, in turn comprise particles.  And if there is a distinct north and south pole to each permanent magnet - then in the same way, following that same correspondence, then the particles would each have a north and south pole.  Effectively they'd be a magnetic dipole.

As to their shape?  We know that we only need to look to symmetry and this because of the conclusions to Bell's theorems which, loosely paraphrased, state that 'the statistical predictions of the quantum theories ... cannot be upheld with local hidden variables'.  All he was pointing to is this.  On a deep, a profound and fundamental level there has to be absolute correspondence - absolute symmetry.  Else matter would not be able to manifest in a stable and coherent way.  In effect he proved that if nature was not that economical and exact with all her rules - if she was not that precise on the very, very small scale - then we would not have this manifest assembly of our structured universe and its miracles of matter presented as it is - one thing distinct from another.  If all was variable then all would be chaos. The most perfectly structured, the most perfectly symmetrical shape is a sphere.  So.  I modestly propose that, just perhaps the basic particle, many of which make up a field, is also shaped as a sphere.  A perfectly round bead.  A ball.  And one half of that ball would be a north and the other half a south. That way the two charge potentials would be locked in a single particle forever married and neutral - but having the precise differences in charge to respond to each other and to all the other particles in the field.

Then the assembly of those particles is relatively straight forward.  They would align as magnets align.  Head to toe.  North to south.  That would form a long string.  And for absolute balance and symmetry, those strings would then close its open ends to form a circle.  I have no idea how long each string needs to be to then form that closed loop or that necklace.  Nor how many necklaces would then make up a field.  But I am reasonably satisfied that to fill all that 'space' that volume of the field itself, it would probably require a variety of lengths and those lengths would logically correspond to the shape of the field as a whole.  (2 Riaan's picture of the single to multiple lines of force from a magnet) And when one introduces differing lengths to the strings then one also introduces a partial imbalance.  One string is marginally different to an associated string.  This would inevitably result in 'like charge' aligning with like charge.  And this, in turn would induce a repulsive moment when the two particles would move apart from each other.  And that movement would induce a 'like movement' in the entire string.  One particle cannot simply move in space if it's fixed inside a line of like particles.  They would all move, one step forward, say.  And this would therefore result in an orbit of the entire necklace.  And in the process of describing that orbit, then other particles in that necklace would move towards other like charges in neighbouring strings.  And the same repulsions would induce more and more movements through more and more necklaces throughout the field.  Eventually all those strings would orbit - all in a shared direction or with a shared justification - and this then would account for the extraordinary velocity of the particles in the magnetic field.  Everything would be spinning at pace and in one direction.

But to analyse the basic properties of the string it is evident that there are various potential spatial dimensions of this.  A single string in the form of a necklace would be one dimensional having only  length.  (1 Riaan's picture of the necklace) Many strings forming a series of concentric circles - something like a saucer - would be a two dimensional field having width and breadth but no depth.

Many saucers piled, one on top the other, would be a three dimensional field.  (Riaan's picture of the torus)

So here's the thing.  Each particle is neutral comprising as is here proposed a magnetic dipole.  Each particle has a field justification which then proposes that the particle itself has one of its two potential charges.  But each orbit cancels out the potential charge in the field making the entire field absolutely neutral.  One can then say that a neutral particle has a justification in a neutral field determined by the orbit of that entire field.

No comments:

Post a Comment