|
BrainChemistry
Captain Obvious



Registered: 06/19/07
Posts: 3,657
Loc: Mountains of N. America
Last seen: 10 years, 24 days
|
The Schwarzschild Proton - Nassim Haramein
#15644689 - 01/10/12 11:53 AM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Hello all - I've seen that there are a couple threads on Nassim on the Shroomery, but they are mostly videos of his lectures which discuss some of his more far reaching postulates, having to to do with ancient cultures and encroaching on the realms of metaphysics. I recently attended a seminar in Boulder, Colorado , presented by Jamie Janover who has been trained personally by Nassim Haramein to deliver the results of his research. He explained Nassim's basic postulates and described how he arrived at his theories for the geometries of the vacuum energy field present in space. I'd love to discuss more of what I learned with those who are interested!!
But here in this thread I would like to stick mainly to a discussion of the physical science behind his ideas. I would like to discuss his paper The Schwarzschild Proton which has been peer reviewed and is published in American Institute of Physics Conference Proceedings. You can read the full paper here, it is only 6 pages long.
Before we start talking, I just want to mention that I have a bachelors degree in engineering, and a minor in astrophysics. So I'm not claiming to be anything close to an expert in general relativity or quantum mechanics, but I have a pretty good grasp on modern physics and the process of deducing physical relationships.
Ok - lets get to the paper. For those who haven't read it or don't have the time to fully read it, here is a copy of the Abstract.
Quote:
We review our model of a proton that obeys the Schwarzchild condition. We find that only a very small percentage (~10^-39%) of the vacuum fluctuations available within a proton volume need be cohered and converted to mass-energy in order for the proton to meet the Schwarzchild condition. This proportion is equivalent to that between gravitation and the strong force where gravitation is thought to be ~10^-38 to ~10^-40 weaker than the strong force. Gravitational attraction between two contiguous Schwarzschild protons can accommodate both nucleon and quark confinement. We calculate that two contiguous Schwarzchild protons would rotate at c and have a period of 10^-23s and a frequency of 10^22 Hz which is characteristic of the strong force interaction time and a close approximation of the gamma emission typically associated with nuclear decay. We include a scaling law and find that the Schwarzschild proton data point lies near the least squares trend line for organized matter. Using a semi-classical model, we find that a proton charge orbiting a proton radius at c generates a good approximation to the measured anomalous magnetic moment.
First, I would like to offer a brief historical description on the "strong" force. When scientists first discovered that atoms contain protons (and neutrons) in their nucleus of like charges, they could not account for the fact that these protons were not being flung apart by the electromagnetic force or what was holding the nucleus together. They therefore postulated the "strong" force, which overcame the electromagnetic. Scientists now believe the "strong" force is a side-effect of quantum interactions of much smaller particles called quarks, and is carried by a particle called a "gluon". An actual gluon has never been observed directly, but has been inferred by the observations of other elementary particles.
Ok - so, all the quantum stuff aside, Nassim Haramein takes a whole new approach to this issue of protons being contained within the nucleus. Rather then invent a new, unknown force, and invent a new unknown particle, Nassim attempts to explain the proton-proton interaction with semi-classical equations and using forces that are already known to exist (gravity). Now in my opinion, this is something that should have been done BEFORE attempting to introduce new, unknown factors into your theories.
Unfortunately...his most basic assumption is the one I have the most troubles understanding, which has to do with the vacuum fluctuation density. The Planck density of 5.16 x 10^93 g/cm^3 is derived from the Planck mass and the Planck Length, which are solved through dimensional analysis. It is a theoretical number (as far as I know) that has not been verified experimentally. However, the presence of vacuum energy has been experimentally verified (called the Casimir effect) and both Quantum Electrodynamics and Stochastic Electrodynamics require that the vacuum of energy of space be on the order of 10^113 Joules / m^3.
What I find most interesting about Nassim's paper is that following from this one assumption (the vacuum energy of space), he is ACTUALLY able to account for the proton-proton interaction using only semi-classical equations and general relativity for mass dilation. Nassim states that if only a TINY fraction (1.78 x 10^-39%) of the vacuum energy contained within a proton were to undergo energy-to-mass conversion, just enough mass to turn the proton into a miniscule black-hole (this is the Schwarzschild condition), then the proton-proton interaction can be completely explained by gravity!!
I find this to be an absolutely stunning conclusion. Nassim further corroborates his hypothesis by applying rotational dynamics and determining the frequency at which two Schwarzschild protons would oribt each other, which is remarkably at the same frequency of gamma ray emissions measured from atomic nuclei.
Nassim also states that the "real" mass of a proton is 8.85 x 10^14 grams, which would seem to be impossible, until you take into account relativistic mass dilation. If protons are orbiting each other at the speeds Nassim postulates (slightly less then the speed of light), this would account for the perceived difference in measured mass from our prospective.
In any case...while Nassim's ideas are merely that - IDEAS, and a new way of looking at the proton-proton interaction, it CANNOT be discounted that he has developed some very interesting relationships that can EASILY describe the "strong" force using classical equations and scaling laws. His theories DO NOT negate quantum mechanics or the existence of elementary particles, it merely suggests a new approach to the relativistic SCALING of our classical equations.
It also suggests that matter and mass come out of the vacuum energy field, and that only a TINY TINY fraction of that energy field is actually manifested as matter.
I dont know about you...but I consider that to be a very deep, almost spiritual, hypothesis!
Please, I would like to hear any thoughts & comments...if you feel like taking a stab at debunking Nassim's approach, please do! Only theories which are firmly grounded have any chance of making an impact on our lives.
-------------------- Word to your mom.
|
OddEye


Registered: 10/08/04
Posts: 453
Last seen: 6 years, 13 days
|
Re: The Schwarzschild Proton - Nassim Haramein [Re: BrainChemistry]
#15644911 - 01/10/12 12:57 PM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Very interesting, thanks for the article
-------------------- I'm at the highest peak, still glad the meak is understandin' me Artillery, thoughts of killin' me is just a fantasy The man in me is ready for war, like Holyfield-Tyson IV
|
BrainChemistry
Captain Obvious



Registered: 06/19/07
Posts: 3,657
Loc: Mountains of N. America
Last seen: 10 years, 24 days
|
Re: The Schwarzschild Proton - Nassim Haramein [Re: OddEye]
#15644972 - 01/10/12 01:11 PM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Wanted to say one other thing regarding quantum particles.
Nassim's theory is that every particle of matter is actually a black hole, including quantum particles (and that our entire Universe is itself a black hole). I don't think he has extended his theories to the scale of quarks yet, but it would apply the same scaling laws as he did for the proton-proton interactions in order to account for the interactions between quarks. It'll be interesting to see if his theories extend to the scale of quarks.
-------------------- Word to your mom.
|
BrainChemistry
Captain Obvious



Registered: 06/19/07
Posts: 3,657
Loc: Mountains of N. America
Last seen: 10 years, 24 days
|
Re: The Schwarzschild Proton - Nassim Haramein [Re: BrainChemistry]
#15647872 - 01/10/12 11:30 PM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Erm...this isn't a bump, but i just want to say i'm really disturbed at all the advertisements that were automatically linked in my thread. WTF shroomery???
-------------------- Word to your mom.
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center

Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: The Schwarzschild Proton - Nassim Haramein [Re: BrainChemistry]
#15661501 - 01/13/12 03:59 PM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
>Nassim also states that the "real" mass of a proton is 8.85 x 10^14 grams, which would seem to be impossible, until you take into account relativistic mass dilation. If protons are orbiting each other at the speeds Nassim postulates (slightly less then the speed of light), this would account for the perceived difference in measured mass from our prospective.
Wait a minute, he says a single proton has a mass of around 80 billion kilos and he explains the lack of the mass showing up as due to mass dilation from high speed? Wouldn't the mass dilation go in the other direction and make them even more massive? This seems to make no sense.
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
BrainChemistry
Captain Obvious



Registered: 06/19/07
Posts: 3,657
Loc: Mountains of N. America
Last seen: 10 years, 24 days
|
Re: The Schwarzschild Proton - Nassim Haramein [Re: Stonehenge]
#15665661 - 01/14/12 02:32 PM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Stonehenge said: >Nassim also states that the "real" mass of a proton is 8.85 x 10^14 grams, which would seem to be impossible, until you take into account relativistic mass dilation. If protons are orbiting each other at the speeds Nassim postulates (slightly less then the speed of light), this would account for the perceived difference in measured mass from our prospective.
Wait a minute, he says a single proton has a mass of around 80 billion kilos and he explains the lack of the mass showing up as due to mass dilation from high speed? Wouldn't the mass dilation go in the other direction and make them even more massive? This seems to make no sense.
Yes.
The mass of 8.85 x 10^14 IS the dilated mass of a typical proton, spinning at relativistic speeds.
In other words, it the frame of reference of the proton (think of this as yourself being the same size as the proton in the vicinity of the proton, watching it spin at speed c) it would weigh 80 billion kilos. In our frame of reference (we can't see it spinning), it weighs 10^-24.
-------------------- Word to your mom.
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center

Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: The Schwarzschild Proton - Nassim Haramein [Re: BrainChemistry]
#15665741 - 01/14/12 02:53 PM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
>The mass of 8.85 x 10^14 IS the dilated mass of a typical proton, spinning at relativistic speeds.
>In other words, it the frame of reference of the proton (think of this as yourself being the same size as the proton in the vicinity of the proton, watching it spin at speed c) it would weigh 80 billion kilos. In our frame of reference (we can't see it spinning), it weighs 10^-24.
Sorry, but that still makes no sense. If it is spinning at close to the speed of light then yes you could have that much mass dilation but it would take speeds of something like 99.99999% of the speed of light. Maybe with a few more 9's added. You seem to be saying since we can't see it, it does not have this mass. Frame of reference does not have anything to do with being able to see something. Clearly it does not have that mass. And the statement says they are orbiting each other at that speed, not spinning.
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
BrainChemistry
Captain Obvious



Registered: 06/19/07
Posts: 3,657
Loc: Mountains of N. America
Last seen: 10 years, 24 days
|
Re: The Schwarzschild Proton - Nassim Haramein [Re: Stonehenge]
#15665869 - 01/14/12 03:29 PM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Actually if you read the paper, he calculated the proton to be spinning at 10^-39% less than c. So, yea 99.999999999999999999999999999999999999999% the speed of light.
A proton is about 10 trillion times smaller than us....we can't see it spinning, therefore we don't account for its relativistic speeds in our models.
In modern physics, the mass of the proton is determined by how much it is deflected by a magnetic field, using the equation
(mv2)/r = Bqv or Centripetal Force = Force due to magnetic field(B)
Clearly, this experiment does not take into account any sort of potential spin of the proton. This equation would provide the rest mass of the proton, measured from our frame of reference.
I'm curious if Nassim has performed any experiments that would be able to verify his theories about proton spin. And whether it is a proton orbiting a proton, or one proton spinning...doesn't matter, we are still talking about it having kinetic energy moving at the speed of light.
The reason he calculated it for two protons orbitting each other was merely to demonstrate the fact that a proton with a relativistic mass of 8.85 x 10^14 would exert forces on a similar scale to the strong force, thereby eliminating the need to create new force to describe how nucleons are held together.
-------------------- Word to your mom.
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center

Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: The Schwarzschild Proton - Nassim Haramein [Re: BrainChemistry]
#15666231 - 01/14/12 04:57 PM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
>A proton is about 10 trillion times smaller than us....we can't see it spinning, therefore we don't account for its relativistic speeds in our models.
What has being able to see it spin to do with its mass? He said it had this huge mass. A frame of reference has to do with moving at the same speed or not, not being able to see something spin.
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
BrainChemistry
Captain Obvious



Registered: 06/19/07
Posts: 3,657
Loc: Mountains of N. America
Last seen: 10 years, 24 days
|
Re: The Schwarzschild Proton - Nassim Haramein [Re: Stonehenge]
#15666436 - 01/14/12 05:59 PM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Hmm...trying to think of another way of describing it.
A frame of reference has to do with both speed as well as scale.
From the human frame, a proton is so minuscule that it is essentially a point in space. Nassim proposes that this point is rotating 10^22 Hz. However, we see it as a stationary point not moving in space. To us it is a just a dot. Therefore we interpret it as being at rest, and having a tiny rest mass of 10^-24.
Now zoom into the proton's frame of reference. Pretend you are holding an orange (the orange is the proton). Now spin the orange up to 10^22 Hz, and that orange is going to have a huge dilated mass, so much so that you would begin orbiting the orange at nearly the same speed.
But zoom way out to the scale of the galaxy and then look back down on the orange...is it really going to make a difference if the orange is spinning? No because the spin doesn't effect anything at that scale. You would calculate the mass of the orange the same way you would calculate the mass of anything else.
But the dilated mass is there, and it does have an effect at its local scale...ie, gravity and holding the nucleus together. Also keep in mind that if this is really true, then all protons & nucleons are spinning at these speeds....hence the combined weight of all the atoms in your body would be on the order of 10^14 grams x 10^27 atoms!! But then again the mass of the air around you and ground beneath you would be on a similar order...so you wouldn't really much notice would you!!
Of course....this all theoretical and highly speculative.
-------------------- Word to your mom.
Edited by BrainChemistry (01/14/12 06:07 PM)
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center

Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: The Schwarzschild Proton - Nassim Haramein [Re: BrainChemistry]
#15668737 - 01/15/12 09:13 AM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Wow, this is like physics through the looking glass. You are saying we don't "notice" the mass of the proton because its so small. The gravitational field of the earth is the sum of the fields of all the particles that make it up. You can't say a proton is hugely massive when you get up close but loses its mass at greater distances. And he doesn't say spinning, he says orbiting around each other which is different. The earth spins on its axis and orbits the sun.
It seems he wants the protons to simultaneously have a lot of mass and not have much at all. Some people do that with their income, they have plenty to spend but uncle sam doesn't notice it because he is far away. Is it like that?
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
BrainChemistry
Captain Obvious



Registered: 06/19/07
Posts: 3,657
Loc: Mountains of N. America
Last seen: 10 years, 24 days
|
Re: The Schwarzschild Proton - Nassim Haramein [Re: Stonehenge]
#15669780 - 01/15/12 01:40 PM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
How would two dots 10 trillion times smaller than your fingernail appear to you if they were orbiting each other. A single spinning dot (until you zoomed in close enough to distinguish the difference). Either way, apples and apples. The point is there is a rotational aspect at relativistic speeds.
Its true that this entire paper is based off a notion that challenges some of our basic views of reality. The idea that a proton contains within itself an essentially infinite density (10^93 g/cm^3), and that in fact every point in the vacuum is infinitely dense (with energy), is a difficult concept to grasp. Our standard model doesn't account for it. The only possible way it makes sense is if the vacuum is in perfect equilibrium. Which is why Nassim's concept of an 8 interlocking tetrahedral vector pattern (64 tetrahedron grid) makes sense for the structure of the vacuum. It is the only pattern that provides total equilibrium at a singularity, for the same reason why a sphere provides total vector equilibrium radiating outward from a singularity. Electromagnetic -> outward, gravity -> inward.
These are the only real forces in nature, in my opinion. All other forces are simply different dynamics of these two forces acting at different scales. Anyway that's a whole other tangent...
The only point he is making with this paper is that there are some very interesting relationships that fall out of our classical equations when using the Schwarzschild solution to Einstein's field equations. Its an attempt at unifying our quantum models and classical models.
There's still a lot of information missing....and maybe it is all a bunch of bullshit. But, its definitely some interesting bullshit!!
-------------------- Word to your mom.
|
|