User:Mgjordan2222/Proto-Physics

OVERVIEW OF PROTO-PHYSICS

Proto-Physics - Before the Beginning

Most General Field Theories begin at the present and work their way back. Quantum Physics claims to have figured everything out to the first incredibly minute moment, but not any closer than that.
The paper, “Proto-Physics: The Atomic Model and Basic Physics,” begins before the beginning of everything...

The beginning of time.

The beginning of matter;

The beginning of space.

Proto-Physics then defines matter and the basic principles of Physics following from the originating singularity, through the Big Bang, and continuing on to everything that followed the Big Bang.

PROTO-PHYSICS IN A NUTSHELL

Using a series of simple paramaters Proto-Physics describes a Fundamental Particle from a state of absolute zero motion to the speed of light.
Fundamental Particle increase in size as their motion increases in velocity, and, this increase occurs in plateau's that are a measure of Planck's Constant. In fact, Proto-Physics defines Planck's Constant as the inertia of a Fundamental Particle.
Each one of these "Planck's Constant" intervals is defined as a Reference Frame.

FUNDAMENTAL PARTICLES

Though Fundamental Particles are a component in matter, they are much more than just the component that makes up the Elements. They are the component that makes up everything, from sub-atomic particles, to matter, to light.
The Elements, what we call "matter," are made up of two, and only two, fundamental particles. The nucleus is a Fundamental Particle, and, the outer field (labeled by Quantum Physics as an Electron) are the two components of an atom of an Element at rest. The difference between these two Fundamental Particles is their motion. Their motion through space place them in different Reference Frames. The nucleus moves at 1/4 the speed of light. The outer field moves at 3/4 the speed of light.

THE PARAMETERS OF PROTO-PHYSICS

Proto-Physics defines itself within the singularity and utilizes several provable components and parameters to define everything that exists.

1. Motion
2. Energy
3. Planck’s Constant
4. The speed of light, c
5. The Big Bang
6. The equivalence of mass and energy
     a. Mass is energy accelerating, absolute motion
     b. Energy is mass decelerating, absolute motion
7. Fundamental Particles
8. The reality that absolute motion exists, as well as subjective motion, with a proof of why this is the case.
     a. The proof is fairly simple
        i. If you define a singularity as a single point
        ii. And, you define motion as movement from one point to another
        ii. Then anything within a singularity is motionless, and this would be an "ABSOLUTE" of motion, or, "NON-RELATIVISTIC" zero motion.
This, in turn, means that there are two boundaries to motion, zero motion and the speed of light, both of which are ABSOLUTE motions and "NON-RELATIVISTIC."
     b. End Proof
9. Combining the Absolute zero velocity with the speed of light (c) Proto-Physics defines the boundaries of motion, and, as zero motion equates to zero mass with the speed of light equates to infinite mass, the boundaries of speed and mass are established.
10. If one graphs Motion and Mass from Absolute zero to the speed of light, and one posits this graph as a straight line, then what accounts for the Lorentz transformation? Proto-Physics determines the Lorentz curve occurs because of the location motion is measured on the graph. If motion is measured from Absolute zero velocity then the Mass / Motion graph is a straight line all the way to the speed of light, however, if the Mass / Motion graph begins at ¼ c then the Lorentz curve will be the result.

Proto-Physics

A 2 fundamental particles approach to physics. 

Discussing alternatives with adherents of the Quantum Physics model for peer review of a new branch of physics - Proto-Physics - that definitively rejects the most basic, founding assumptions of Quantum Physics is next to impossible. Proto-physics is founded upon a model vastly different from the Quantum Model and because of this it stands virtually no chance to be evaluated because it is summarily rejected by the scientific community. I've come to the realization only by accessing a forum were a new atomic model may be freely evaluated by everyone will Proto-Physics ever be seriously evaluated.
Wikipedia seems to be that forum. A place where new ideas may be shared, edited, and evaluated. Where a concept can be scrutinized by many and through this process measured as effective and functional, or not.

Over the last 80 plus years millions of people have attempted to make the Quantum model work and have yet to have transcended the many internal contradictions found within this model. This article argues that an original, founding, premise of the Quantum Atomic Model is incorrect. This premise stated the atom of Elements was made up of 3 primary fundamental particles: the Proton; the Neutron; and the Electron, except in the case of Hydrogen. The reasons behind these 3 components were based on extensive research at the time, the 1920's, when the Periodic Table was being developed and atomic weight was being compared to atomic number. This trinity of fundamental particles was an assumption based on the formulations at that time that lead to the conclusion the atom must be made up of 3 primary components.

What if that assumption was wrong?

What if a different model described a valid functional structure?

Proto-Physics argues: “Individual atoms in the Elements are made up of only two primary components, the nucleus and the outer (electron-labeled) components. It takes this argument from the instant prior to the Big Bang to the present and will, at some point, include all phenomena.
It further argues Plank's Constant is the inertia [1] of a Fundamental Particle.

HISTORY

Examining the origin of Quantum Physics, it seems that 1927 is the time period when the orbital model of the atom [2] originated and the trinity of proton, nuetron, and electron began to take shape. Since this time the Quantum model has been hammered and shaped without success into some semblance of a model. This has culminated in a belief by many Quantum Physicists that there is no answer. That

THE ARGUMENT

What if one of the founding principles of Quantum Physics was wrong? Quantum Physics has, as a founding principle, a 3 fundamental particle atomic model. This viewpoint is an axiom in the foundation of Quantum Physics and has played a fundamental role in its evolution over the last 80 years. Quantum Physics embraced the concept of relativity in such an absolute way that it has become a foundation that denies the existence of absolutes.

When it comes to motion, only relative motion is discussed. Non-relative motion is ignored.

When it comes to point of view, only subjective views are considered. Objective points of view are discounted.

Proto-Physics argues that this founding principle is flawed. A 2 fundamental particle model for matter will lead to a much more comprehensive and effective model.

THE FIRST STEP

Until Quantum Physics proves that the 2 fundamental particle model of Proto-Physics is not a valid one, then Proto-Physics has greater justification for research than Quantum Physics.

EXTERNAL LINKS

• example.com