In my last post I found the equations describing a toroidal helix with half a wind. Then I tried to figure out how it would turn into a Möbius donut and turned this:
into this:
I already knew that there was something off with this approach, but I couldn’t come up with anything better for the last post.
I spent the last ten days trying to figure out ways to explain the mechanism of gamma photons folding into electron-positron pairs and just become more confused. So today I decided to try to forget for a while the mechanism of the formation of electrons and positrons and went back into trying to describe the structure of the electron double donut without reverting to miracles.
I knew that I'm no good at visualizing the structure myself, so I went by to Blender to figure out what the structure could/would look like. Luckily there are all kinds of tutorials available for blender, so I ended up applying the tutorial to twist and bend an object to half of a cylinder.
After many failures (despite the tutorial being relatively clear), I finally succeeded. I first made a long, thin cylinder, from which I cut off the top and the bottom and which I also cut in half lenghtwise. Then I added a modifier in blender, where I twisted the cylinder for 180 degrees (i.e. half a wind, as in the Wolfram alpha model). This time it wasn’t a helix that was twisted, but a two-dimensional plane bent into a half of a cylinder. Then I bent the twisted half of a cylinder by 360 degrees and got the structure below.
But this only represents one half of the toroidal helix. What next? The next step was rather clear, once I saw the first half of the donut. I would need to make a mirror image of the first half.
Rather comically, for a while I was convinced I had made an error in Blender, because the mirrored structure didn’t look loke I had initially imagined. But eventually I realized that the mirrored structure I had created really was correct. The Möbius double donut really looked like a proper donut only at the very thin slice where the two halves connect. Otherwise, the ribbons of string more or less overlapped. The largest overlap was at the opposite end of the connection, with full overlap.
Here we need to understand that the above structure aren’t a bunch of circular loops of strings together, but rather each of the loops are interconnected in a way, where the whole electron is just a single loop of elementary particles (dots) folded into a single orbital.
But wait, there’s more! Remember when I said that you can’t push a string? What does this mean for our odd-looking partly open donut? It means that the dots at the edge of the bent ribbon aren’t moving alongside the ribbon, but rather they are moving perpendicularly to the length of the string. To some extent the ribbon is constantly trying to unravel, but this unraveling generates the shape of the donut to the empty area where the dots ‘fly’ at the speed of light. This means that the Möbius donut spins so that the location of the connection point of the two halves is constantly changing.
And this action is what generates the negative charge for the electron. I might want to still introduce a bit more mathematical rigor to this description, but it’s already pretty close to miracle-free.
So is this an electron? It seems like it, but I'll have to see how it fits to everything else I've introduced to make a definite statement
I’m very tempted to apply this ribbon-donut model of an electron to a proton and attempt to figure out what a hydrogen radical would look like. You see, the counterevidence paper deals with large Van der Waals molecules of hydrogen molecules (H2), which behave very differently than hydrogen atoms (more specifically hydrogen radicals) that are extremely reactive and quite hard to create in the lab. But if I want to make clear that the proposed model of large Van der Waals molecules isn’t contradicting with the current understanding of individual hydrogen atoms, I’ll probably have to say something.
It's taken over a month since I realized that the properties of hydrogen are explained by Van der Waals molecules to the realization of the structure of the electron without miracles. Let’s see how long it takes for me to describe the proton using the Möbius ribbon.
If you have any questions on anything on this post, feel free to ask in the comments. I haven't yet come up with the proper equation to describe the full Möbius Donut shape, where one loop continues seamlessly to the next loop and I don't know the size of the double donut (in meters). Neither am I 100 % convinced that the ratio of the outer and inner diameter I found is accurate.
But just as a concluding remark take note that the string theory and more specifically the M-theory is the current best theory of everything. M-theory requires a phenomenon called compactification, which requires extra dimensions. However, when the electron is described in this manner, the process of compactification is a process that doesn't require extra dimensions. You can compare this approach to the Kaluza-Klein theory, where Theodor Kaluza already in 1919 describes a "cylinder condition". Well, here we have half-cylinders that require no extra dimensions.
Here we have the classic case of Occam's razor: "The simplest explanation is usually the best one." Are there really extra dimension, or are there just elementary particles of just one size, each moving at the speed of light? Or quoting Sherlock Holmes "How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?"
So if extra dimensions are impossible, what other explanations there are? I don't know of anything else.
Commentaires