For a fleeting instant I thought that was able to present the absolutely final error-free model of the reflection of elementary particles of energy (kaus/dots) in today’s post. But as soon as I looked at my model in detail, I realized that the model was only correct if the reflection depicted in the model was perfectly symmetrical. That is, the model is mathematically 100 % correct, but just doesn’t represent the reflection found in the physical world.
Ok, let’s back up a bit. So, what is this almost error-free model? I took the principles of the “Grazing Kaus Form a Double Helix” post and applied them to a double-helical model comprised of yellow cylinders depicting connection of 2r between grazing kaus and red cylinders with a length of >2r. With these elements I could build a perfectly symmetrical structure with purple grazing paths between the vertices of the double helix. And this is what it looks like:
The model has a familiar hi-hat shape from my previous posts, but probably relates to a different geometry than in any of my previous posts. And as I said, there is mathematically absolutely nothing wrong with this shape. Except that in this model the kaus move in a helical path around a straight line. In this simple shape this isn’t as obvious, but if you were to replicate the shape and for a chain of these, the chain would be perfectly linear.
The next question is: “do I need a new shape to account for the reflection along a non-linear path?” The answer is most probably no. That is, the overall shape above remains the same, but half of the yellow cylinders won’t be connected and thus will have a length higher than 2r. This should mean that the overall shape should remain more or less the same, but that half of the purple grazing paths should be a bit twisted. I won’t be able to explain this more precisely in this post, but hopefully I’ll be able to add this final missing element to my next post.
I do have to own up that I wasn’t fully correct in my last post. I said:
“The million-dollar-question is “is this the final truth?” While I can’t be 100 % sure, I’d say if I were a betting man, I might even bet some money on it.”
As far as I understand it, the grazing double helix is really a double helix. But unlike what I implied in the post, the double helix is a ripped one. That is, the kaus don’t graze past three other kaus, but just two. A minor change all-in-all, but this means my last post wasn’t the final truth. I already know that this post isn’t the final truth, but the next one just might be.
Comments