The curve with the 104.5 degrees is interesting....and what about the moment 1.8 Debye = 6.1 10-30 coulomb.m ???
Just curious about your ideas .
If spheres are inserted the spherical fields and thus correlated evidently?
Sometimes I am fascinated by these H2O too CH4 OR NH3 ....?and their properties stil misunderstood.
Regards
Steve
Why for you the glycine is different ,smaller and no chiral ?
This effect has a cause ....
What do you think about the 20 others amino acides ?
In the vegetal world I see too an relevant link with chlorophyl and the caroten like in the lipidi liaison ,the hydrophobs and hydrophyl poles are very relevant with spheres and their specific rotations implying mass and rules by polarisations .
Our protiens are really fascinantings ,what do you think Uncle Al ?
Regards
Steve
Dear Uncle Al,
Thank you for responding. I almost entirely agree: Reality is something that can be observed. If someone has a job that demands high skill in performing observation and does not tolerate wrong interpretation then it he is perhaps more qualified than any priest or theoretician. Spinoza defined infinity as something that cannot be increased. He still understood that a line does not consist of as many points as you like.
Read at least the introduction of my essay :
Physics is subject to some general fundamentals that deserve absolute priority:
At first, theory has to obey reality, not the other way round. ... Accordingly the traditional concept of causality is indispensable. ... Unfortunately, such attitude is at odds with ... general symmetry conjectured by Wigner.
and two headlines
1) Mutually contradicting claimed impossibilities: Common sense has won
3) How to cope with what is behind Cantor's paradise?
I am convinced that not just your finding but also the main claims of my essay can and will be further tested by experiments and in practice. Maybe, your experiment as well as the expensive use of LHC will contribute.
Regards,
Eckard
The parity Eotvos experiment requires enantiomorphic atomic mass distributions. Composition is irrelevant, proven by prior Equivalence Principle tests. Dense atomic packing has small internuclear gaps. Lighter atoms and smaller unit cells allow more repetitions/loaded mass, ~30 grams total, limited by suspensory filament tensile strength, Attachment #1. Test masses cannot be volatile in vacuum, thrust!
Quantify maximum geometric parity divergence: First, enantiomorphic crystallographic space groups without conflicting screw axes: right handed 3(1), 4(1), 6(1) or 6(2) vs.left-handed 3(2), 4(3), 6(5), 6(4); or racemic screw axes: 2(1), 4(2), or 6(3). Glycine is P3(1) and P3(2). Glycine being achiral, crystal chiral resolution is absolute as it grows. Atom packing is remarkably dense. Quartz is P3(1)21 and P3(2)21, the two-fold rotation axis being irrelevant to chirality. Other resolved amino acids are in Sohncke space groups (by default) but not in enantiomorphic Sohncke space groups.
Second, David Avnir's semi-empirical quantitative analysis. Chem. Mater. 15 464 (2003), Acta Cryst. B60 163 (2004), Tetrahedron: Asymmetry 17 2723 (2006). Quartz is published as an extreme example
Third, Michel Petitjean's ab inito quantitative analysis for all spatial dimensions, and QCM software for explicit calculation, J. Math. Phys. 40(9) 4587 (1999). CHI = 0 is achiral, CHI = 1 is maximum theoretical parity divergence. Add a crystal lattice grower to QCM. Quartz was calculated to 4.44x10^17 atoms - a visible mass. Attachment #2. Scatter is the minute variation of CHI with incremented lattice radius.
With only the identity automorphism allowed (COR = 1, DSI = 0), CHI is a function of the eigenvalues of the inertia matrix. CHI is then a connection among eigenvalues, special functions, their representation theory with solid angles, and exponentials of fractions of pi at a characteristic scale. CHI validation obtains by calculating the fitted graphic line slope from the crystal lattice smallest helix angle, "phi", 110.56° (neutron) or 110.53° (x-ray),
log(1 - CHI) = -2[log(radius)] + [(180 - (phi))(pi)/60] - (pi)
Three published crystal structures that had disparate graphic vs. calculated slopes were subsequently revised. It works.
The odd-parity Chern-Simons term added to even-parity Einstein-Hilbert action in quantized gravitations is explicit. Teleparallel gravitation is explicit. General Relativity will measurably lose the Equivalence Principle to a falling pair of shoes. The chiral anisotropic vacuum background a parity Eotvos experiment detects will falsify conservation of angular momentum through Noether's theorems, impacting quantum mechanics. String theory is falsified by counterdemonstrating BRST invariance. Vote a 10! Somebody should look.Attachment #1: erotor1.jpgAttachment #2: qzdense.png
I agree, Eckard, that theory cannot be empirically falsified and survive (except as a facile heuristic - Newton is good). I have no objection to theory proposing outrageous contingencies *if they are testable*. One cannot easily embrace the EPR paradox or the magnetic and electric Aharonov-Bohm effects, yet they perform at will. Hund's paradox is equally outrageous but untested. I predict that it will fail (make excuses) given a small rigid resolved chiral molecule like norbornenone.
As you say, even philosophy ultimately and fundamentally arises from postulated symmetries. Philosophy is not easily falsified, god being a particularly slippery (and empirically bloody) concept. Physics begins with the most extreme symmetries and visibly fails in its derivation. Physics is riddled with chiral exceptions and routinely embarrassed by initially denied then accepted empirical examples. So assaulting philosophy might best wait for seeing how physics fares, for a failure will be beyond debate.
My mortal sin is putting the whole of physics at risk with trivially performed experiments arising from chemistry, a lesser science unworthy of regard. Physics does not fear obtaining one more net null output. Physics desperately fears obtaining its first net nonzero output. Everybody would be selectively wrong, falling to an organic chemist. Nasty.
If observed reality is fundamentally left-handed, philosophy has missed something big. One imagines Islam will be particulary chagrined. Somebody should look. The first black swan is the important swan.
Dear Alan-
I partly agree with the abstract of your essay, where you say:
Gravitation and quantum mechanics are separately accurately predictive to the limits of observation but together are utterly incompatible. No contemporary quantum gravitation theory offers testable predictions.
I think there is potential solution for those issues. QM is a local theory whereas GR is a global theory. According to de Broglie's work, an electron exhibits and oscillation [1]. This is experimentally confirmed [2]. GR also allows oscillating solutions, making it temporarily local. To my mind, the oscillation allowed by GR is way too large. When you accept that an electron performs some kind of local oscillation then quantum and relativistic behavior become unified. My essay covers some details. Please also consult the comments on the essay, which offer important clarifications.
References
1. L. de Broglie. Non-linear wave-mechanics - A causal interpretation.
2. M. Gouanere, M. Spighel, N. Cue, M.J. Gaillard, R. Genre, R. Kirsch, J.C. Poizat, J.
Remillieux, P. Catillon, L. Rourrel. Experimental observation compatible with the particle
internal clock. http://www.ensmp.fr/aflb/AFLB-301/aflb301m416.pdf.
Dear Ben,
Did you already ponder about the local/global issue in signal processing? STFT is localized by means of an arbitrary window. My method to calculate a spectrum by means of elementary cosine transforms is globally comprehensive even if this is not easily comprehensible.
I would appreciate if you could confirm that my M290 is readable to you. I do not imagine electrons like circulating points. Wouldn't such point need a velocity in excess of c as to compensate the electrostatic force?
Dear Uncle Al,
Experimental falsification as well as confirmation can be wrong. I gave examples in my essay.
Isn't any contingency not at all exactly testable in principle if we allow for the non-existence of closed systems in reality? Shannon: Future is unknown, in principle, but we can influence it.
I didn't say that science arose from postulated symmetries. On the contrary, I found out that claimed mirror symmetry of signals tends to be the result of lost realism. Since you are a chemist, you have possibly more often to do with Emmy Noether's conservation than with the opposite: irreversible processes, which I consider one-sided in reality while arbitrarily scalable and even reversible after abstraction. You will hopefully agree that ideal symmetry tends to be rare in reality. Ideal symmetry often rather indicates mathematical artifacts.
Regards,
Eckard
Dear Alan (I'm sorry I have to post a corrected version) -
I partly agree with the abstract of your essay, where you say:
Gravitation and quantum mechanics are separately accurately predictive to the limits of observation but together are utterly incompatible. No contemporary quantum gravitation theory offers testable predictions.
There is a potential solution for those issues. QM becomes a somewhat realistic local theory when the paradoxical results from interference experiments are ignored.* Elements of this local theory were developed by de Broglie, without relying on abstract QM postulates [1]. According to de Broglie, an electron exhibits an oscillating behavior. This behavior has been experimentally confirmed [2]. On the other hand, GR is a rather global theory. It has oscillating (big bang - big crunch) solutions, which suggest temporarily local relativistic behavior. To my mind, the spatial oscillation allowed by GR is way too large. When an electron performs a local oscillation, then it unifies quantum and relativistic behavior in a single process. My essay covers some details. Please also consult the comments on the essay, which offer important additions and clarifications.
* Traditional QM does not say anything about photons and therefore, strictly, cannot say anything about photon interference. The 'non-local behavior' that supposedly occurs in (photons and massive particle) interference experiment requires an instantaneous (faster-than-light / non-physical) collapse of the wave function. This phenomenon remains to be explained in a different 'realistic' fashion.
References
1. L. de Broglie. Non-linear wave-mechanics - A causal interpretation.
2. M. Gouanere, M. Spighel, N. Cue, M.J. Gaillard, R. Genre, R. Kirsch, J.C. Poizat, J.
Remillieux, P. Catillon, L. Rourrel. Experimental observation compatible with the particle
internal clock. http://www.ensmp.fr/aflb/AFLB-301/aflb301m416.pdf.
Dear Eckard-
I plan to read your essay and already took a quick look at it. I assume that you mean a Fourier transform.
In my view, the notions of electrostatic force and charge are long-range notions. So, they cannot be applied to extremely short ranges when non-linear weak interaction comes into play. Current theory mixes the short- and long-range perspective and then ends up with fractional charges. In my essay, I try to explain this (with shortcuts, but see ref in essay).
In QFM, particles are dynamic entities created by the attractive interaction between two different fundamental fields, which have different mobilities. Because the protofields have different mobilities and they are attracted to one another, any moving protfield perturbation must also rotate (spin). At any 'distance' from the dynamically created space point, the perturbation moves at the speed-of-light, but gets twisted ('entangled') like water flowing down a drain.
The electrons are not circulating points. Electrons are dynamic oscillating protofield perturbations which, as part of their reduction-expansion behavior caused by protofield attraction, dynamically create space points at the rate of their oscillation frequency,. Calculation gives an oscillation frequency of 10^20 Hz, which is backed by [1].
Reference
1. M. Gouanere, M. Spighel, N. Cue, M.J. Gaillard, R. Genre, R. Kirsch, J.C. Poizat, J. Remillieux, P. Catillon, L. Rourrel. Experimental observation compatible with the particle internal clock. http://www.ensmp.fr/aflb/AFLB-301/aflb301m416.pdf.
Very interesting all that .
Don't stop dear friends .
Regards
Steve
Interesting point of vue .
You say "the two-fold rotation axis being irrelevant to chirality"
Could you develop it's interesting and new for me like the Noether's ?theorems,I am going to learn more .
But why this irrelevance ?Please develop a little .
Regards
Steve
Many things are interestings but some ONES are bizare in your essay?
About the HH fusion could you develop and why a density of 0.007869 nm3/atom ?
Steve
Geometric chirality is the non-superposability of an array of points and its mirror image (one coordinate axis reversed in sign) in space by translation and rotation only. Find the three principle moments of inertia. Their mutual intersection is the center. Superpose the two centers, original and mirror-image, then use quaternions or Euler angles. Globally minimize the sum of squared distances between corresponding points, set and mirror-image set. Zero sum (achiral) or non-zero sum (chiral) obtains. Parity is a stronger limit in 3-space - sign inversion of all three coordinate axes.
If you have e.g. a tetrahedron with four differently colored vertices, you cannot superpose the same colors, tetrahedron and mirror-tetrahedron. Gravitation is empirically blind to all measurable test mass properties including composition (color chirality). All test mass atoms are identical, anonymous, unit mass points. Nobody knows if left and right shoes vacuum free fall identically.
A chiral array of points in 3-space will NOT possess Sn improper (rotation-reflection) axes: mirror plane(s) S1, inversion point, S2, or higher Sn axes (e.g, S4, a baseball seam). Invert a left glove to get a right glove. Cn pure rotation axes are irrelevant. You cannot rotate a left shoe to superpose upon a right shoe.
Optical rotation does not detect or measure geometric chirality or parity divergence. Silver thiogallate, AgGaS2 with non-polar achiral tetragonal space group I-42d has 522°/millimeter optical rotation along [100] at 497.4 nm. 2-Norbornanone has [alpha]D = 29.8° cm^3/g-dm. 2-Norbornenone has [a]D = 1146.° cm^3/g-dm. Their respecitve atoms are essentially superposable except for olefinic hydrogens. Attached stereogram norone.png
Those who value theory to the exclusion of experiment are cowards. The only reality is empirical reality. Theory predicts what it is told to predict by observation. Nobody knows if left and right shoes vacuum free fall identically. Somebody should look.
Maximum qualitative self-similar, periodic atomic mass distribution chirality is acheived by three enantiomorphic crystallographic space groups of 230 possible space groups overall. Maximum quantitative parity divergence is ab inito explicitly calcualable with Petitjean's QCM software. A parity Eotvos experiment opposing space groups P3(1)12 and P3(2)21 quartz is guaranteed to output at least the gold standard of 420+ years of Equivalence Principle testing - zero net output.
Dirac scolded Stern (of Stern-Gerlach) that proton magnetic moment (a terrifically difficult observation at the time) could be calculated far better than it could be measured. Otto Stern got the Nobel Prize/Physics 1946. Theory gave the wrong answer.
The proper test of spacetime geometry is maximally nonsuperposable atomic mass distribution geometry. Ignorance is not a form of knowing things, theory is impotent. Somebody should look.Attachment #1: norone.png
Uncle Al - you are a legend.
I have very little schooling in these matters though I am adressing that issue now. I only have the one thought on all this, if you will indulge a student...
Chiral molecules are not symmetrical, but...
Say you have your left shoe, and your right shoe, and you break these down into atoms within a spherical vacuum. The vacuum is given poles at each dimension (not polarity)so as to ascertain geometry within the sphere. Could you assign these atoms to their respective positions 3 dimensionally on the opposite pole and come up with the same shoes, only the left is now the right (albeit upside down) and vice versa?
Wouldn't this denote symmetry, if it works?
If it doesn't work, why?
Never let your legend get in the way of your potential.
Keep up the good work.
GAL.
Parity gravitation tests arise from orthodox physical theory (e.g., teleparallel gravitation), are rigorously derived, reduce to practice, and can falsify broad swaths of contemporary physics without contradicting any prior observation. You see how this outrages theorists and their untestable unorthodox extensions of theory. Somebody should look.
Paul, 1178 words? $25K grows quartz in both hands: chemical purity (no lascas' aluminum), dryness (Grade A), and low dislocation density (etch pits/cm^2). I've talked with academic groups. Senior faculty grant funding wants zero-risk, zero-innovation, PERT-charted productivity. A third class of gravitation experiment that accepts a parity test is being constructed by better people. Years to go.
The Eot-Wash group "vision" is zero-risk, zero-innovation, http://www.npl.washington.edu/eotwash/publications/pdf/lowfrontier2.pdf
It disavows a parity Eotvos experiment opposing spacetime geometry with test mass geometry. 420+ years of perfect failure does not justify a different approach. My paper will be published in a *mathematics* journal, early 2010. Referees passed it. They will not be embarrassed if it works to spec.
Gal - it is not about molecules or compartmentalization. The Coupe du Roi cancels chirality by pairing homochiral entities. The entire mass distribution is considered. A countable number of anonymous unit mass points with overall three finite moments of inertia comprise the test mass (metaphoric " shoe"). Create the inverted set and quantitatively compare. Inversion occurs in many ways. An exact method is required. Turning a shoe inside-out reverses it, as does an odd number of mirror reflections along axes or mixed axes, relative to the origin or to an external point of view.
In 3-space, find the three principle moments of inertia. Their axes intersect at the center of mass as (0,0,0). Build Cartesian (x,y,z) and locate each point (+/- x,+/- y,+/- z). The parity-inverted set is (-/+ x,-/+ y,-/+ z). Fast, easy, exact. A candidate test mass snugs QCM-calculated CHI = 1, perfect normalized parity divergence, by a few angstroms radius from any contained coordinate - and sustaines. A qualifying test mass also QCM calculates COR =1 (the identity element, from graph theory) and DSI = 0 (direct symmetry index - a set's similarity to itself). DSI is... complicated. http://petitjeanmichel.free.fr/itoweb.paper.JMP.1999.petitjean.pdf
Summary: Nobody knows if maximally divergent left and right shoes falsify vacuum isotropy in the massed sector. Said shoes are rigorously defined, reduce to practice, and insert into existing apparatus. Go ahead folks, dump in 1000 "1" votes. You cannot answer the question, I can, and all physics depends on its outcome. The limit to physics is the politics of fear having replaced endeavor, process (management) not product (experiment).
Thanks Al
I appreciate the time you took to answer my question. I understand now I think... the shoes once transposed on opposite poles would still be chiral. As they are chiral their functions will differ so symmetry of eye does not denote true symmetry. The transposition does nothing to alter the chiral nature of the shoes.
These chiral molecules fascinate me and make me wonder how many of our drugs are counterproductive chiral molecules, this will explain a lot of contraindications and why one mans cure is anothers poison. I guess with you being an organic chemist this is very old news to you.
I'm doing my first biochemistry module now. So far so good.
Somebody has look !
Alan, or should that be "Nathan",
Some points I hope you appreciate.
1. I always enjoy your writings despite their repetitiveness, the need for which I appreciate. you are the master of "Can do !, Can Do !"
2. Luck ain't no lady.
3. Perhaps (see my essay) your approval of others who endorse your view is unstinted because "Your ayes are the ayes of an author in love" ?
Terry, I don't vote here. I'd be biased as a synthetic chemist who believes in experiment, maximizes yield, and has a waste crock. "UMPOLUNG!" When nothing works by the book, try the opposite. The universe is not unfriendly, merely selective with whom it shares a hug. Books get rewritten.
420 years of Equivalence Principle testing sum to a perfect net zero output. Either the EP is true or its falsification does not reside in composition. No gravitation theory contains composition. Gravity is geometry. A pistol fires any kind of bullet, lead ball to Glazer, but caliber matters. So perhaps gravitation in kind.
I propose an unremarkable experiment in existing apparatus using off-the-shelf materials; performed by the book by skilled and skeptical personnel. Amorphous fused silica is the versus quartz control - versus left, versus right, and versus itself to verify a true null output baseline. Applied mathematical analysis of geometric parity divergence is sufficiently well wrought to be published in a refereed mathematics journal (galley proofs ho!).
A non-null output would rework physics: gravitation through EP falsification, conservation of angular momentum then QFT through vacuum anisotropy. No prior observation would be contradicted, for physics ignores metaphoric shoes. The past is abject failure. As for the future... somebody should look.
Dear Uncle Al,
I'm also applying some symmetry ideas from Physical Chemistry towards an SM/ GR/ boson/ fermion TOE. The primary difference is that you seem more intently focused on 3-D crystallography, whereas I'm playing with multiple dimensions. You should understand my geometries better than many of the other contestants. I would appreciate a critique.
Have Fun!
Dr. Cosmic Ray
p.s. - I've heard you called a "super-villain". You need better alliances...
