Appendix Page 1.
The Sub-quantum mechanical level structure of elementary particles combined with a kinematic/ dynamical Higgs-virgin vacuum is suggesting deterministic new physics .
It was David Bohm (1917-1992) who constructed ideas in his attempt to reconcile relativity with quantum mechanics. He didn't call this new physics because he didn't expect observable and testable differences as this model does. It is interesting to look for parallels between this model and Bohm’s ideas:
A: Bohm's Alternative to Quantum Mechanics : Scientific American May 1994. Page 39) stating: The Laws of physics are fully deterministic and that what they describe, are the motions of particles ... etc.
B: David Bohm and F. David Peat: Science, Order and Creativity, ( Routledge London 1987)
(Page 6) .... David Bohm: It was really because the quantum theory, and to a lesser extent relativity, were never understood adequately in terms of physical concepts, that physics gradually slipped into the practice of talking mostly about the equations. Of course, this was because equations were the one part of the theory that everyone felt they could really understand. But this inevitably developed into the notion that the equations themselves are the essential content of physics. To some extend this began as early as the 1920s when the astronomer Sir James Jeans proposed that God must be a mathematician. Heisenberg later gave it an enormous boost with his idea that science could no longer visualize atomic reality in terms of physical concepts and that mathematics is the basic expression of our knowledge of reality. Along with this went a whole change in the notion of what was meant by an intuitive or imaginative grasp. This had previously been identified with the ability to visualize ideas and concepts, but now Heisenberg was claiming that intuition and imagination provide not a picture of reality but a mental display of the meaning of the mathematics. Now I don't agree with these developments. In fact, I feel that the current emphasis on mathematics has gone too far.... (Page 27) .... Aristotle's theory corresponds to what could be called a common sense view of nature.
No matter how hard a stone is thrown, experience shows that it eventual comes to rest on the ground. 'Newton's system, which replaced Aristotle's, argued that the natural state (of matter) is one of motion, in which rest, or zero velocity, happens to be a special case. An object therefore moves in a straight line, or remains at rest, indefinitely unless some force acts on it. Under the action of a force, the motion changes and its rate of change is expressed by Newton's second law of motion. Newton's laws of motion appear, at first sight, to contradict 'common sense , for they suggest that if all opposing forces are somehow removed, then the stone (and the cart) will continue to move in a straight line forever.
Common Sense.
My common sense is, that there is still remaining opposing vacuum deceleration force on the stone, which is in equilibrium with the continues acceleration forces (Jack Sarfatti would say: “Warp drive”: propulsion by the vacuum) produced by the same vacuum (on the 'quantum mechanical level]'), to explain everlasting continuing motion in a straight line. This line can be curved due to local differences of the vacuum and even flip 180 degrees in the neighbourhood of a black hole ( Higgs-virgin repulsion ), due to the special properties of the new black hole and the sub- quantum mechanical level SHAPE of elementary and Higgs-virgin particles (see page: 7-9).
Appendix Page 2.
C: David Bohm: causality and chance (1957) by Routledge and Kegan Paul Ltd. London.
Chapter IV: (page 104) Alternative interpretations of the quantum theory.
In the previous chapter, we saw
that the usual interpretation of the quantum theory requires us to give up the
concepts of causality, continuity, and the objective reality of individual
micro-objects, in connection with the quantum-mechanical domain. Instead it
leads to a point of view in which physics is said to be inherently and
unavoidable restricted, in this domain and below, to the manipulation of
mathematical symbols according to suitable techniques that permit, in general,
the calculation only of the probable behaviour of the phenomena that can be
observed in the macroscopic domain.
These far-reaching changes in the conceptual structure of physics have been based on the assumption that certain features of the current formulation of the quantum theory, viz. the indeterminacy principle and the appearance of a characteristic set of opposing complementary pairs of modes of behaviour (e.g. wave-like and particle-like), are absolute and final features of the laws of nature, which will continue to apply, un-contradicted and without approximation, in every domain that will ever be the subject of physical investigation.
IV,2: (page 106) ... We note, first of all, that if one adopts the hypothesis of a sub-quantum mechanical level containing hidden variables, then,.. we are led to regard the statistical character of the current quantum theory as originating in random fluctuations of new kinds of entities, existing in the lower level. ... so that by broadening the context we may diminish the indeterminacy below the limits set by Heisenberg's principle.
IV,4: (page 111) ... We begin by recalling that in the
quantum-mechanical domain matter is able, under different conditions, to show
either wave-like or particle-like behavior, so that it is evident that the wave
concept and the particle concept are each, by themselves, incapable of dealing
with the full richness of properties demonstrated by matter in this domain On
the other hand, It is evidently possible in any given process, both wave and
particle could be present together in some kind of interconnection.
(page 112) ... The next step is to assume that associated with this body (the electron) there is a wave, without which the body is never found. This wave will be assumed to be an oscillation in a new kind of field, which represented mathematically by the Ø field of Schrödinger. ... We now assume that the In the previous chapter, we saw that the usual interpretation of the quantum theory requires us to give up the concepts of causality, continuity, and the objective reality of individual micro-objects, in connection with the quantum-mechanical domain. Instead it leads to a point of view in which physics is said to be inherently and unavoidable restricted, in this domain and below, to the manipulation of mathematical symbols according to suitable techniques that permit, in general, the calculation only of the probable behaviour of the phenomena that can be observed in the macroscopic domain.
Ø field exerts a new kind of quantum-mechanical force on the body, a force that we can understand why it has not previous turned up in the study of the large scale domain. We also suppose that the body may exert a reciprocal influence on the Ø field....
(page 113) ... Hence it is not unreasonable to support that the Ø field is undergoing random fluctuations about an average that satisfies Schrödinger’s equation and that these fluctuations communicate themselves to the body. ... on the other hand, the bodies could obtain a random motion from a sub-quantum mechanical level in other ways, as in ordinary Brownian motion, by direct interaction with new kinds of entities existing in the lower level. (Page 114) ... What is the meaning of this result? It means that instead of starting from Barn's probability distribution as an absolute and final and unexplainable property of matter, we have shown how this property could come out of random motions originated in a sub-quantum mechanical level. (page 116) ... Indeed the Ø field itself may well be only an average of new kinds of variables that are defined at the lower level. It is also quite possible that the approximation in which we neglect the reciprocal action of the body on the Ø field would break down here. Moreover, it is quite evident that the approximation in which we regard the body as a point (and thus neglect the inner structure) must break down in processes taking place at the lower level.
Appendix Page 3.
Examples of the Cosmological consequences.
See also page: appendix: 4. Date: 5-9-1996. NGC: 6543: Cat's eye (Sky & Telescope: April 1995, page 12). NGC: 650/51 (Planetary nebulae: by S. Pottash: D.Reidel publ.co. figure: I-11) NGC: 3628 (Gaseous halo: The Astroph. journal 461: plate:13,1996 april.20)
NGC 6543, is about the most complex known planetary nebula. If we construct a dumbbell black hole system in this nebula, as we also suggested for Eta Carina at page: 29, ( fig: F) it seems that we need two more Black Holes as would be normal for planetary nebulae. Therefore we suggest that this system is based on: four black holes (10 and 11) as is plotted on appendix: page: 4.
The asymmetrical distribution of the visible matter (12) at the elliptical cutting edges (13) of the Higgs-virgin-repelling cones (14) suggest that there should be angular momentum effects (15) of the ejected visible matter (12). patches of visible matter (16) seem to be also concentrated: on the two secondary cutting edges (17), as well as on the places where the secondary black holes (11) should be positioned. The cutting-edges (13 and 17) can be interpreted as extra density waves in relation with the primary ring-shaped 'density wave (18) originated by the two main black holes.
The gaseous halo (soft X-ray-0.25 keV. emission) of NGC 3628 seem to indicate also four black holes, two by two positioned on both sides of the galaxy. This picture can be seen as evidence for the supposed relation between Galaxies and black holes mentioned at pages, 10-26.
A planetary nebula structure based on two black holes is given by NGC: 650/51. The ejected matter is concentrated in a ring-form (20) in between the black holes, and also In two 'bubbles' with a diabolical origin.
Planetary- and double coned matter ejection of Planetary Nebulae. The ejection process of planetary nebulae can be understood by taking into account that the two black holes did form the central star by Higgs-virgin-repelling (see: page 27 fig: B). The central star is highly unstable due to the peculiar diabolical Higgs-virgin-impulse profile which is present in the center between two black holes (see page 29: Fig: E. position: 20) This is contrary to the standard Higgs-virgin-impulse-profile in ordinary space (page 29 fig: D). The form of the star even will be not globular but anti- diabolical , forming a disk perpendicular to the axis between the two black holes, and two 'bulbs' on both sides of the disk, positioned on the axis between the two black holes. The constant supply of mass to the star will first bring the rim of the disk out of equilibrium, due to the increase of (from the star) radiated graviton-pressure and the proportional decrease of radiated Higgs-virgin-pressure. This will originate ejection of particles with circular polarization. Circular polarization is described on page 29 fig: E, position: 50, and is suggested to be the origin of the standard ejection-process of planetary nebulae, forming a ring structure where the circular polarization will stop: on the ring-formed density-wave between the two black holes (see page 27, Fig A,B, position: 10 . For not standard ejection-forms of planetary nebulae like: NGC650/51, we suggest that there exist a second circular polarization direction of particles, if the plane of circular polarization is tilted into the direction of the diabolical Higgs-virgin-impuls profile lobes (page 29, fig E, position 20 nr. 6). The existence of this second polarization direction is suggested to depend on the absolute dimensions of the two black holes (B.H.). Both, planetary and diabolical ejection-forms, are observable in the Universe, and even in combined form as is seen in NGC 650/51, and Eta Carina (page 29).
Appendix Page 4 (plates :not enclosed)
Appendix Page 5.
The Magnetic (North- South) Dual Identity Test Instrument.
Photograph of the improved instrument, to measure the dual identity or the difference between North and South radiation of the Earth’s magnetic field. The instrument is developed as a successor of the measuring instrument described at page 19 fig. C. having more directional sensibility by the amplifying effect that mu-metal tubes have on a magnetic field.
Description of the instrument.
The instrument is made out of a rotating holder (1) placed in a half-open container (2) provided with elevation scaling in degrees (3). A tube (4) made out of mu-metal is placed in the holder (1). The tube has two diameters. A self-balancing compass (5) is placed in the mu-metal tube where the diameter of the tube is maximal (6, the backside). The backside of the tube is half closed by a bended mu-metal sheet (7). If the front-side of the tube is closed with a second mu-metal sheet (8), the compass doesn't give any directional indication, proving that the Earth magnetic field doesn't have any influence on the compass. If the front-side of the tube (8) is open (without the sheet) the compass is giving different indications depending on the 360' Earth-magnetic orientation and the elevation angle to the horizontal plane, up to 63 degrees indicated by the scaling (3).
According to the theory (page 19, fig. B) there is a boundary layer in the Earth magnetic field between the North (5) and South (6) radiation.
The interesting angles of measurement of the Earth-magnetic field are therefore the angles around this boundary layer, so between the North and the South indications of the compass. It is surprising that in this region the compass needle has always two so called double indications . The needle is stable at two distinct positions with 90 degrees deviation to the central axis of the tube. The conclusion out of these measurements is, that the elevation of the boundary layer between North and South radiation was at that moment; dated 44-1997 at Weesp The Netherlands; 22.5 degrees tilted from the North side to the horizontal plane . In the meantime this elevation has increased to 31' dated 16-4-1997 at the same place, indicating to be a very unstable angle. On the equator this elevation angle should be 90 degrees. Measurements later made in Greece are supporting this statement.
Appendix Page 6.
The origin of the magnetic dipole of the Electron and up or down Atoms.
The Electron is suggested to have a cone-propeller form. Due to Higgs-virgin vacuum interaction (propulsion) the electronic propeller will become Two different rotational motions.
A: an axial spin rotation (in the sketch called axial (propeller) rotation ), which is arbitrarily assumed here to be always right-handed for the Electron .
B: a circular spin rotation (in the sketch called spin rotation ) which is assumed to be the origin of bipolar behaviour such as the up or down properties . The right-handedness of the electron is suggested to be the origin of all chirality examples in nature. (see also sci.Amer.jan.1990 p 102.)
|
Theoretical form of the electron, with radiation cones due to axial rotation. (see also page; 4,28,29) |
The electron with radiation cones due to circular or spin rotation and axial rotation. |
Simplified radiation cones of the electron due to circular spin-rotation and axial spin rotation .
Chirality of the electron around the atom nucleus. The orbital angular momentum (L) is originating an extra dipole radiation (1), in addition to the axial and spin angular momentum (S) originating radiation given by (2) The resulting angular momenta (J) are produced by a spin-up atom with a major dipole (3) and a spin-down atom with a minor dipole (4).
Appendix Page 7.
The nuclear polar connection with the so called magic numbers.
|
Quarks are supposed to be composed out of one or more electron- or positron propellers as a base, combined with one or more (clicked-on) photons. (page 3) This is supposed to be the origin that d- and u-quarks should have a comparable qualitative radiation spectrum as electrons and positrons in relation to their axial- and spin rotation (app. page 6) The resultant image of this spectrum for a combination of quarks d-u-u (the proton) is plotted in figure A. The magnetic polarity of the d-u-u quarks together with the electric repelling force between the two u-quarks is tending to align and attract the quarks as given in figure A, having the minimal energy configuration. (The neutron will have the anti parallel structure) Because quarks and electrons transform Higgs-virgin-particles into other photons, neighbour quarks will feel a Lorentz polarization (page 9,28) forcing to tilt the nose-side of the particle away from it, (see fig. A, 1) and as a result, they will be repelled away from the neighbouring particle. The massive Higgs-virgin-impulses on the backside of the propeller cone and the a-symmetry of the spin rotation is responsible for this phenomenon. (page 9,28) The combination of four photons (N. S. E+. and E-, each acting repelling or attracting is resulting in 8 (gluon) forces). The gluon counterbalancing Higgs-virgin photon, is according to this model responsible for the well known Strong force. The choice out of 5 clicked on photons (N. S. E= and E- plus the visible light photon) is responsible for the colour of the quarks, which is assumed to be responsible for slight differences in the radiation spectrum of each quark. (page 3) |
|
Geometrical
Polar-Ring Solution for Magic Numbered Nuclei.
It is well known that if the neutron- or proton number within atomic nuclei have the following quantities (2, 8, 20, 28, 50, 82 and 126: the magic numbers), then the atoms are showing a more than average stability. As an example, the most stable form of Lead PB126 is an integration of two T= 82 and T=126 structures called “Double Magic”. (see figure B) see: http://home.planet.nl/~vuyk0022/App_Vuyk.htm#appendix7 In contrast, so called sub magic nuclei, are nuclei which show also a more than average stability, but less manifest than the magic numbered nuclei. The numbers found by experiments seem to be: 14, 38,40,64,108,114,120,152, and 162. The described Geometrical Polar Ring proposal, explains both, the Magic- and Sub Magic Numbered Nuclei within a systematic growing model for nucleons. It was the famous professor Linus Pauling, who proposed similar geometrical solutions for Magic numbered nucleons. See: http://www.tshankha.com/detailed_atomic_structure.htm . However by comparison it will be clear that the solutions in this model described are based on a more simple nuclear Polar/Ring Structure.
Explanation:
Each magic numbered nucleon is supposed to have a polar axis
which is occupied by an even number of nucleons.
This axis is the centre of the coaxial placed symmetrical
and globular system of circular trajectories or rings.
The planes of the rings are supposed to be concentric and
perpendicular to the polar axis.
Each circular trajectory is occupied by even numbers of
nucleons, as represented in the figures below.
These
figures have to be interpreted as central sections
over the axis of the globular nucleus.
The magic number nuclei with 82 and 126 nucleons have a
second "concentric inner system" of nucleons.
Number T=82 has only one inner ring with 6 nucleons, and
number T=126 has three inner rings with respectively 6,8, and 6 nucleons.
Based on this growing system we may construct and suggest the
next magic numbers= 178 and 244.
It
would be interesting to study on the intermediate transitional "jump"
situations in nature, between these structures.
See the figure B:
There are 7 magic numbered ATOM NUCLEI systematically
represented, as a central section through the axis of the more or less globular nucleus, starting with nucleon
number: T=2, and in succession T=8, 20.28.50,82 and 126.
The dot sign
represents an axial located nucleon.
There are two types of circular located nucleons:
Type A: outer ring located Nucleons: represented in figure B
as a closed rectangular with a number X
enclosed. This represents a circular
trajectory (ring) occupied by X nucleons, concentric with he polar axis of the
nucleon.
Type B: so called
Inner ring located Nucleons: represented in figure B as a closed rectangular
with an internal horizontal striping and an external located number Y.
This represents a circular trajectory
occupied by Y nucleons, concentric with the polar axis of the nucleon.
For T=2, there are 2 axial nucleons.
For T=8, There are 2 axial nucleons, and 6 ring nucleons= 8.
Or, as an alternative: 4 axial nucleons, and 4 ring nucleons=8 nucleons.
For T=20, There are 6 axial nucleons, and 14: (4+6+4) ring
nucleons= 20 nucleons. Or, as an alternative : 4 axial nucleons and 2x8 ring
nucleons.
For T=28, there are 8 axial nucleons, and 20: (6+8+6) ring
nucleons=28 nucleons.
For T=50, there are 12 axial nucleons, and 38:(6+8+10+8+6)
ring nucleons.
For T=82, there are 16 axial nucleons, and 66: (6+8+10+12+10+8+6)+
(6:in the inner ring) ring nucleons=82 nucleons.
For T=126, There are 20 axial nucleons, and 106:
(6+8+10+12+14+12+10+8+6)+(6+8+6: in the inner ring)=126 nucleons.
As a result: we may assume that all nucleons should have
more or less the same combined
structure of Axial and Concentric Ring located Nucleons, as the origin of
atomic up or down polarity.
So called submagic nuclei, are nuclei which show also a more than average stability, but
less manifest than the magic numbered nuclei.
The numbers found by experiments seem to be: 14,
38,40,64,108,114,120,152, and 162. If we look at the 7 magic numbered nucleons
(see also figure B http://home.planet.nl/~vuyk0022/App_Vuyk.htm#appendix8 ), it is obvious that it represents 7
special Polar/Ring shaped moments within a growing nuclear scheme. As a
consequence, there should be intermediate geometrical structures possible between the seven different cross sections given in the figure B, with
equatorial symmetry and more or less deformed globular structures.
For T=14, it is assumed that there are 6 axial nucleons and 8 ring nucleons.
For T=38, there are 10 axial nucleons and 28 (6+8+8+6) ring nucleons.
For T=40, there are 12 axial nucleons, and 28 (6+8+8+6) ring nucleons.
For T= 64, there are 16 axial nucleons and 48 (6+8+10+10+8+6) ring nucleons.
For T=108, there are 18 axial nucleons and 90 (6+8+10+12+12+10+8+6) + (6+6+6: in the inner ring).
T=114, is assumed to be basically identical with T=126, however with subtraction of the two inner rings occupied with each 6 nucleons.
T=120, is assumed to be also corresponding with T=126, however with extension of 2 extra axial nucleons (22 total) and with subtraction of the single inner ring occupied with 8 nucleons.
T=152, is assumed to be also corresponding with T=126, however with extension of 4 extra axial nucleons (24 total) and with addition of an extra “double equatorial ring ” (8+14=22 nucleons) adding 26 extra nucleons to the T=126 nucleus.
T=162, is assumed
to be corresponding with T=126, however
with extension of 4 extra axial nucleons (24 total) and with addition of 2x
double equatorial rings (8+14+14+8=44
nucleons) and under subtraction of two inner rings of 6 nucleons. As a result
this nucleus should have a cylindrical non-globular form elongated along the
nuclear axis. 
(Figure B. The schematic geometrical Polar Ring representation of these nucleons placed in magic number nuclei)
New Geometrical
Polar Ring Configuration for Electronic Shells.
The Common Geometrical explanation for Electronic Shell Configuration is based on the so called Bohr Atom, which is supposed to have a nucleus, with one or more different shaped Electron shells called : s,p,d,f, containing a maximum number of respectively 2,6,10 and 14 electrons, with different energy levels called 1,2,3,4 etc. placed more or less concentric around the Nucleus. According to the NULEAR Polar Ring solution (explained before see: http://home.planet.nl/~vuyk0022/App_Vuyk.htm#appendix7 ) , it is challenging to search also for a causal Alternative Polar Ring structure of ELECTRONIC configuration around a CENTRAL ATOMIC POLAR AXIS.
I found such a possibility, by postulating that the common explanation of NUCLEAR CONCENTRIC ordered Shells, could be interpreted as AXIAL CONCENTRIC ordered energy level Shells in the form of a series of well defined RINGS around a common Electronic CENTRAL ATOMIC AXIS. As a consequence, it is assumed that the Nuclear Polar Axis (explained before) will tend to be in line with the Electronic Polar Axis and even that the central Electronic Axis should be able to approach the Nucleus quite close. However, it must be admitted that it seems to be counterintuitive that higher energy levels are created not by larger Bohr Atom Electron Shells, but by more Electronic Ring shaped Shells tacked around a CENTRAL STRING OF AXIAL ORDERED ELECTRONS.
Examples given for closed Shells of Noble Gases: For: He(2): Axis; occupied by: 1x2=2 electrons, For: Neon (10): Axis occupied by 2x2 electrons, Rings structure occupied by 1x6 electrons, For Argon (18): Axis: 3x2=6, Rings: 2x6=12 electrons. For Krypton (36): Axis: 4x2=8, Rings; 3x6=18+1x10. Total= 36 electrons. For Xenon (54) : Axis: 5x2=10, Rings: 4x6=24+2x10=20. Total= 54 electrons. For Radon (86): Axis : 6x2=12, Rings: 5x6=30 +3x10=30 +1x14. Total= 86 electrons. For UUO (118): Axis:7x2=14, Rings: 6x6=36 + 4x10=40 + 2x14=28. Total= 118.
It is even possible to describe the Magic Numbered Nucleons within this system, only by using the numbers 2,6,10,and 14.
For T=8 axis: 2 nucleons, Ring 6 nucleons. For T= 20: axis: 8, Rings: 2x6 nucleons. For
T=28: axis: 6, Rings: 2x6+10.. For T=50: Axis: 12 nucleons, Rings: 3x6+
2x10. For T=82: Axis: 14 nucleons,
Rings: 4x6+3x10+1x14. For T= 126: Axis:
16 nucleons, Rings: 7x6+4x10+2x14 nucleons.
Appendix Page 8.
The basic
identity of the Lorentz-force.
The arbitrarily suggested right-handed intrinsic axial spin , as a basic identity of the electron (and d-quark), is the origin of the different magnetic polarities of up and down (electronic or d-quark) states. (app. page 6.) If a free moving electron is entering a common N-S symmetrical magnetic field, it tend to become a dipole polarity opposite aligned with the magnetic field (the up state) and will come into a cyclotron orbit due to the normal Lorentz force. This cyclotron orbit is supposed to be the origin for the electronic production of a secondary magnetic field with the same polarity as the primary magnetic field in the up state. If (by external sources) the electron is forced to come into the down state, the polarity will flip upside down and will act against the orbital magnetic field.
The electron can also be brought into different energy states. (the isolated electron; Sci. American aug.1980,p. 91. P.Ekstrom) The energy states of the electron depend on the size of the electron orbit (given by the value of the quantum number n), and on the orientation of the particle's spin vector (down or up). For each spin orientation there are series of almost equally spaced energy levels corresponding to the various cyclotron orbits, and resembling a pair of ladders which are displaced vertically by slightly more than one rung. In the same cyclotron, the spin down electron has a larger cyclotron orbit than the spin up electron, proving that the Lorentz force is minor to a spin down electron and major to a spin up electron. Consequently based on this Higgs-Virgin Vacuum model, this means that the mutual combined impulses of magnetic and Higgs-virgin-particles have a different effect related to the up or down electron. These impulse differences are forcing to slow down (or retard) the nose of the electron more or less in one specific angle situated on the plane of the circular spin rotation (nose retardation). Consequently, from the opposite side the massive Higgs-virgin-impulses on the bottom-side if the cone, are producing a force, the Lorentz-force.
Figure C (not enclosed)
The basic origins of forces on mass carrying particles. In Figure C, the electron (or d-quark) is represented having axial- and spin rotation, creating a specific South and North pole.
There are three kinds of polarization's possible for the complex spinning electron (positrons and quarks included). 1: Circular nose tilting : tilting the nose-side of the electron for minimal one cycle of the spin rotation in the direction (1) or (2) originating a force (3) respect. (4) perpendicular to the plane of the spin rotation, due to the massive Higgs-virgin-impulses on the base of the cone. This polarization is originating the repelling or attraction of dipoles. Examples are: the Stern Gerlach effect, quark repelling and the common magnetic attraction and repelling etc.. 2: Directional nose tilting : tilting the nose of the electron each cycle of the spin rotation in the direction (1) or (2) in only one specific nose angle or nose direction, orientated on the This polarization is responsible for all directional guidance of dipoles. (see app. page 9) 3: Nose retardation (5): retarding the spin rotation velocity of the electron for only one specific angle or nose direction, orientated on the circular plane of the spin rotation. This polarization is originating the Lorentz-force, acting always perpendicular to the applied magnetic field and to the electrons absolute velocity direction in the vacuum.
Appendix Page 9.
Circular “Nose
tilting” and “Nose retardation”.
The former three polarization's of particles can act in combination with each other and alone. The so called Lorentz-transformations has to be originated by the mutual influence of the polarization type 1 and 3, Circular nose tilting and Nose retardation. Each absolute moving particle in space, can compensate the opposing Higgs-virgin particle pressure (wind) from all directions related to the spin rotation axis with the aid of circular nose tilting and nose retardation .
Double indications and magnetic field-lines. Referring to the former pages, directional nose tilting is responsible for all magnetic directional guidance of dipoles, contrary to the circular nose tilting which is responsible for magnetic attraction or repelling. Directional nose tilting should be consequently the only origin for the double indications of the compass-needle of the improved instrument given on appendix page 5, A closer view to this phenomenon is given on figure D. Figure D.
Figure D. and Figure E (not enclosed)
Figure D. is representing an electron-dipole (or d-quark), having two kinds of intrinsic spin (axial rotation and circular rotation). In a homogeneous and inhomogeneous magnetic field, this electron dipole (the compass-needle is composed out of many electron (and quark) dipoles) will balance (turn) to a position depending on the mixture and direction of the incoming and interacting North and South magnetic particles, from one side of the instrument (8). (see also page 19).
The electron-dipole (figure D) is acting as a balancing compass-needle in a way, that the nose is pushed by directional nose tilting (1) or (2), by the continuous collision pattern composed out of Higgs-virgin (vacuum) particles and the magnetic North and South photons. The mixture of North (3) and South (4) photons is originating the stable balancing angle (5) of the dipole measured to the average direction (6) of the incoming magnetic photons. This phenomenon does take place around all magnetic devices producing magnetic field-lines like our planet or a bar-magnet. (figure E) The only difference is, that the improved instrument (app. page 5) is focussing the incoming photons more or less ideal from one direction to the balancing dipole (fig. D), while in normal magnetic field situations (figure E) the directions of the incoming photons are more spread out, having wider angles (7) between the incoming North and South photons. As a consequence, the magnetic field-lines in the improved instrument interior (appendix page 5) have a bubble-structure which are overlapping each other.