Essay Abstract

According to Standard Model of Particle Physics: strong, electromagnetic and gravitational interactions have one gauge boson each (gluon, photon and the hypothetical graviton) that mediate these interactions. Why the weak interaction has three intermediate vector bosons: W, W-, and Z0? When a neutron decays into a proton, the neutron releases a W-, which decays into an electron or the high mass Muon or Tau and changes the neutron into a proton, an electron (e-) and a neutrino. In the opposite reaction turning a proton into a neutron, a W particle is needed. But the neutron (939.57 MeV) or proton (938.28 MeV) has very little mass as compared to a W boson (80.4 GeV). Wherefrom they get such high energy? Gravity is an inter-body force, whereas the others are intra-body forces. Can they be united in one theory? Why cannot we produce and control gravity? Is there a fifth force? What is charge? How does Coulomb's law apply to quantum interactions? Why is the efficacy of the relation e = mc2 in chemical reactions much less compared to nuclear reactions? Just like space and time in their universal manifestation appear as spacetime that forms the background for all objects and events, and in their individual or confined manifestation appear as the interval between objects and events, the same single force in its universal manifestation appears as gravity and in its confined manifestation through compression, refraction, rarefaction and diffraction, resolves into the other four fundamental interactions of Nature. Mathematics describes only the quantitative aspect of reality. Here you find the causes of fundamental interactions: the "what", "how", "why", "when", etc.

Author Bio

seeker of truth with an open mind.

Download Essay PDF File

Dear basudeba mishra,

Reliable evidence exists that the surface of the earth was formed millions of years before man and his utterly complex finite informational systems ever appeared on that surface. It logically follows that Nature must have permanently devised the only single physical construct of earth allowable.

Joe Fisher, Realist

    Dear Sir,

    Thanks for your appreciation. I am open to any logical questioning or criticism. Unfortunately, most modern scientists follow a reductionist approach and superstitiously believe in "established theories". I hope people will apply their minds openly without any preconceived notions and correct me, if they think so.

    Regards,

    basudeba

    12 days later

    Dear Basudeba Mishraji

    It is nice meeting you again....

    Very nice essay on fundamental particles... For your question,... what is Gravity? I think gravity is property of mass and mass is the property of gravity, what do you say?

    Here in my essay energy to mass conversion is proposed................ yours is very nice essay.... I highly appreciate hope your essay and hope for reciprocity ....You may please spend some of the valuable time on Dynamic Universe Model also and give your some of the valuable & esteemed guidance

    Some of the Main foundational points of Dynamic Universe Model :

    -No Isotropy

    -No Homogeneity

    -No Space-time continuum

    -Non-uniform density of matter, universe is lumpy

    -No singularities

    -No collisions between bodies

    -No blackholes

    -No warm holes

    -No Bigbang

    -No repulsion between distant Galaxies

    -Non-empty Universe

    -No imaginary or negative time axis

    -No imaginary X, Y, Z axes

    -No differential and Integral Equations mathematically

    -No General Relativity and Model does not reduce to GR on any condition

    -No Creation of matter like Bigbang or steady-state models

    -No many mini Bigbangs

    -No Missing Mass / Dark matter

    -No Dark energy

    -No Bigbang generated CMB detected

    -No Multi-verses

    Here:

    -Accelerating Expanding universe with 33% Blue shifted Galaxies

    -Newton's Gravitation law works everywhere in the same way

    -All bodies dynamically moving

    -All bodies move in dynamic Equilibrium

    -Closed universe model no light or bodies will go away from universe

    -Single Universe no baby universes

    -Time is linear as observed on earth, moving forward only

    -Independent x,y,z coordinate axes and Time axis no interdependencies between axes..

    -UGF (Universal Gravitational Force) calculated on every point-mass

    -Tensors (Linear) used for giving UNIQUE solutions for each time step

    -Uses everyday physics as achievable by engineering

    -21000 linear equations are used in an Excel sheet

    -Computerized calculations uses 16 decimal digit accuracy

    -Data mining and data warehousing techniques are used for data extraction from large amounts of data.

    - Many predictions of Dynamic Universe Model came true....Have a look at

    http://vaksdynamicuniversemodel.blogspot.in/p/blog-page_15.html

    I request you to please have a look at my essay also, and give some of your esteemed criticism for your information........

    Dynamic Universe Model says that the energy in the form of electromagnetic radiation passing grazingly near any gravitating mass changes its in frequency and finally will convert into neutrinos (mass). We all know that there is no experiment or quest in this direction. Energy conversion happens from mass to energy with the famous E=mC2, the other side of this conversion was not thought off. This is a new fundamental prediction by Dynamic Universe Model, a foundational quest in the area of Astrophysics and Cosmology.

    In accordance with Dynamic Universe Model frequency shift happens on both the sides of spectrum when any electromagnetic radiation passes grazingly near gravitating mass. With this new verification, we will open a new frontier that will unlock a way for formation of the basis for continual Nucleosynthesis (continuous formation of elements) in our Universe. Amount of frequency shift will depend on relative velocity difference. All the papers of author can be downloaded from "http://vaksdynamicuniversemodel.blogspot.in/ "

    I request you to please post your reply in my essay also, so that I can get an intimation that you replied

    Best

    =snp

      Dear Sir,

      Thanks for your comments. I will definitely go through your essay and offer my views.

      Regards,

      basudeba

      5 days later

      Dear Basudeba,

      Very interesting essay in the spirit of a deep Cartesian doubt. You give new ideas, eidoses, conepts and important conclusions that are aimed at overcoming the crisis of understanding in the basis of fundamental science. Yes, really today we need an open mind. Successes in the contest!

      Yours faithfully,

      Vladimir

        Dear Basudeba Mishra,

        I have read your essay and invite you to read my essay on wave-particle and electron spin at: https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3145 or https://fqxi.org/data/essay-contest-files/Rajpal_1306.0141v3.pdf

        Kamal Rajpal

          8 days later

          Dear Basudeba

          If you are looking for another essay to read and rate in the final days of the contest, will you consider mine please? I read all essays from those who comment on my page, and if I cant rate an essay highly, then I don't rate them at all. Infact I haven't issued a rating lower that ten. So you have nothing to lose by having me read your essay, and everything to gain.

          Beyond my essay's introduction, I place a microscope on the subjects of universal complexity and natural forces. I do so within context that clock operation is driven by Quantum Mechanical forces (atomic and photonic), while clocks also serve measure of General Relativity's effects (spacetime, time dilation). In this respect clocks can be said to possess a split personality, giving them the distinction that they are simultaneously a study in QM, while GR is a study of clocks. The situation stands whereby we have two fundamental theories of the world, but just one world. And we have a singular device which serves study of both those fundamental theories. Two fundamental theories, but one device? Please join me and my essay in questioning this circumstance?

          My essay goes on to identify natural forces in their universal roles, how they motivate the building of and maintaining complex universal structures and processes. When we look at how star fusion processes sit within a "narrow range of sensitivity" that stars are neither led to explode nor collapse under gravity. We think how lucky we are that the universe is just so. We can also count our lucky stars that the fusion process that marks the birth of a star, also leads to an eruption of photons from its surface. And again, how lucky we are! for if they didn't then gas accumulation wouldn't be halted and the star would again be led to collapse.

          Could a natural organisation principle have been responsible for fine tuning universal systems? Faced with how lucky we appear to have been, shouldn't we consider this possibility?

          For our luck surely didnt run out there, for these photons stream down on earth, liquifying oceans which drive geochemical processes that we "life" are reliant upon. The Earth is made up of elements that possess the chemical potentials that life is entirely dependent upon. Those chemical potentials are not expressed in the absence of water solvency. So again, how amazingly fortunate we are that these chemical potentials exist in the first instance, and additionally within an environment of abundant water solvency such as Earth, able to express these potentials.

          My essay is attempt of something audacious. It questions the fundamental nature of the interaction between space and matter Guv = Tuv, and hypothesizes the equality between space curvature and atomic forces is due to common process. Space gives up a potential in exchange for atomic forces in a conversion process, which drives atomic activity. And furthermore, that Baryons only exist because this energy potential of space exists and is available for exploitation. Baryon characteristics and behaviours, complexity of structure and process might then be explained in terms of being evolved and optimised for this purpose and existence. Removing need for so many layers of extraordinary luck to eventuate our own existence. It attempts an interpretation of the above mentioned stellar processes within these terms, but also extends much further. It shines a light on molecular structure that binds matter together, as potentially being an evolved agency that enhances rigidity and therefor persistence of universal system. We then turn a questioning mind towards Earths unlikely geochemical processes, (for which we living things owe so much) and look at its central theme and propensity for molecular rock forming processes. The existence of chemical potentials and their diverse range of molecular bond formation activities? The abundance of water solvent on Earth, for which many geochemical rock forming processes could not be expressed without? The question of a watery Earth? is then implicated as being part of an evolved system that arose for purpose and reason, alongside the same reason and purpose that molecular bonds and chemistry processes arose.

          By identifying atomic forces as having their origin in space, we have identified how they perpetually act, and deliver work products. Forces drive clocks and clock activity is shown by GR to dilate. My essay details the principle of force dilation and applies it to a universal mystery. My essay raises the possibility, that nature in possession of a natural energy potential, will spontaneously generate a circumstance of Darwinian emergence. It did so on Earth, and perhaps it did so within a wider scope. We learnt how biology generates intricate structure and complexity, and now we learn how it might explain for intricate structure and complexity within universal physical systems.

          To steal a phrase from my essay "A world product of evolved optimization".

          Best of luck for the conclusion of the contest

          Kind regards

          Steven Andresen

          Darwinian Universal Fundamental Origin

            Dear Mishra

            "Gravity is the mother force, which resolves into four fundamental interactions. These five can form non-linear combinations that produce infinite varieties".

            I believe that you mean the gravity is the fundamental force of all, that I agree

            Here is my essay which I think has many interesting ideas to you, please comment ....

            FUNDAMENTAL SINGULARITY OF ALL PHYSICAL SCIENCE.

            Sincerely

            Bashir.

              Basudeba,

              Finally got to yours (so many to read & so little time!) and glad I did. I didn't absorb all completely but found it very interesting and agreeable. I certainly agree the; "causes of fundamental interactions: the "what", "how", "why", "when", etc." are of paramount importance.

              I'm also interested in what is an 'anti-positron' and your statement "the electron and the anti-positron are not the same particle". Is that based solely on 'measurement' data from momentum exchange with other ('detector') fields spinning electrons? If a north pole spins left and a south pole spins right what's goes on when we view from the other side?

              Hope you'll read mine; If you like "what", "how", "why", "when" and can follow a multi stage ontological sequence from a 'Poincare sphere' 4 state electron you'll find a classical outcome for QM, yes, amazing' as Bell predicted! It'll prove you correct about 'duality'; "these two apparently contradictory properties have not been reconciled, the quantum world has been thought of as showing wave-particle duality; rather than a definitive, objective world".

              Yes. It always was nonsense. Be prepared for a revolution within a few Eons! (lol). Hope you get to read it (but VERY carefully!) Scoring yours now - should get you up a bit.

              Very Best

              Peter

                Dear Sir,

                Thanks. I was busy elsewhere. I will read other essays soon.

                Regards,

                basudeba

                Dear Sir,

                Thanks. I was busy elsewhere. I will read other essays soon. I will definitely read and comment on your essay.

                Regards,

                basudeba

                Dear Sir,

                Thanks. I was busy elsewhere. I will read other essays soon. I will definitely read and comment on your essay.

                Regards,

                basudeba

                Dear Sir,

                Thanks. I was busy elsewhere. I will read other essays soon. I will definitely read and comment on your essay.

                Regards,

                basudeba

                Dear Sir,

                Thanks. I was busy elsewhere. I will read other essays soon. I will definitely read and comment on your essay.

                Regarding your point about electron and anti-positron, we must distinguish between electron and the positron first. One is negatively charge, whose characteristic, as I have discussed, is confinement of emissions from a central point. Hence, its position is at the periphery. The other is positively charged, which radiates out from a central position. This positional difference is exhibited in their characteristic, when we consider the anti-particle. Roughly speaking, a neutron is the same as a combination of a proton and an electron. But that is a hydrogen atom. Then how are these different? The difference comes from their positional difference. Consider a person sitting on a Judge's chair and the same person sitting at his home on the dinning chair. At one place, he is a Judge and at the other place, he is a husband or a father. The person is same, but the functions are different. Similarly, for an electron and anti-positron, the masses may be the same, but the functions are different. You can extend this argument much further.

                Regards,

                basudeba

                Write a Reply...