Archive for the 'Mathematics' Category

Nov 17 2022

The Coulomb Gauge    

There is another name for a free graviton, – it is “the identity isomorphism idEx, here denoted 1x, and the elements 1x, x ϵ M, act as unities for any multiplication in which they can take part” ([1], pg. 4). We see that unlike π (pi), idEx has some degree of circular polarization and/or skewed sine waves. In some writing instances π is the same as idEx and I am not trying to dictate how they should be used.

In the “Coulomb, radiation, or transverse gauge. This is the gauge in which ∇ · A = 0” ([2], pg. 241), we have a classical description. In the tensor sense, we have the forms Χij. The direction we choose for Χ is always transverse to the radial electric field at a chosen point, and the coordinate frame Ui is picked centered on the same point, creating a k-plane. We have that “The forms Χij are the transition forms for the Lie algebroid atlas {Ui, ψi, Θi}” ([1], pg. 206), and Θi varies with the density of the gamma ray field:

http://www.fruechtetheory.com/blog/2022/10/05/the-vector-potential/

Considering the transition form TP/G [1], we may here call G the density of the gravitational field. It is seen that as the density goes up the transition angle Θi decreases for a given charge and distance from the charge.

In Jackson’s problem 6.19 (b), “the original and space-inverted vector potential differ by a gauge transformation” ([2], pg. 291). Though the earth catches some of the sun’s gravitons all the time, the sun’s gravitons during the day are greater at the face of the earth than at night, and inverted, changing the Coulomb gauge.

With the “Lorenz condition (1867), ∇ · A + (1/c2) ẟφ/dt = 0” ([2], pg. 240), it is mathematically shown that the system {Ui, ψi, Θi} acts fast compared to the gradient of A, and
           ιX (φ ˄ ψ) = ιX(φ) ˄ ψ + (-1)i φ ˄ ιX(ψ)              ([1], pg. 306)
Also, as small as gravitons are, we may as well call the k-planes “flat connections Θi“ ([1], pg. 206).

Since we have “t the fixed point set of θ” ([3], pg. 401), t is on the center line of a gamma ray, and “g0 = t0 + p0 is a Cartan decomposition of g0“ ([3], pg. 184). In certain situations the center can shift as well, in which case “c0 is the center of t0” ([3], pg. 452) as t0 moves back and forth.

With the polarization factor, it is interesting to call h the vector summation of two gamma ray electric fields. When a gravitational field is yet more compact, h is the summation of more than 2 electric fields, so that “f: MH be a smooth map” ([1], pg. 183), and “Let h be a proper subalgebra of g of maximum dimension” ([3], pg. 160).

Incidentally, the identity isomorphism reminds us of quantum 1:

http://www.fruechtetheory.com/blog/2009/09/16/the-fundamental-quantum-unit/

[1] Mackenzie, Kirill C. H., “General Theory of Lie Groupoids and Lie Algebroids”, c. 2005 Kirill C. H. Mackenzie, London Mathematical Society
[2] Jackson, J. D., “Classical Electrodynamics, Third Edition”, c. 1999 John David Jackson, John Wiley & Sons, Inc
[3] Helgason, Sigurdur, “Differential Geometry, Lie Groups, and Symmetric Spaces”, American Mathematical Society, 2012

No responses yet

Oct 05 2022

The Vector Potential

In electrodynamics we find that “A quantum-mechanical description of photons necessitates quantization of only the vector potential” ([1], pg. 242), as in the summation of all the manifolds of gravitational fields at a given location. In a more densely packed summation of manifolds, the action of an electric charge will have a lesser rotational effect on the electric fields of the gamma rays than on a less dense field. The power of the rotation is the same in either field however, as long as we are referring to a gravitational field that is not too sparse for electric fields to propagate.

“The definition of B = ∇ x A specifies the curl of A, but it doesn’t say anything about the divergence – we are at liberty to pick that as we see fit, and zero is ordinarily the simplest choice.” ([2], pg. 235) The reason we may pick the divergence as zero is that the manifolds “are frozen in time for phonon transmission”:

http://www.fruechtetheory.com/blog/2022/03/29/transmission-of-the-coulomb-field/

As far as group action, Mackenzie [3] calls these “groupoids”, such as an ellipsoid, a spheroid, or another 3-dimensional shape. The definition of a spheroid I find is that it is like a sphere, but not a perfect sphere, and in the present case we have “oscillations and accordion motion in multiple axes”:

http://www.fruechtetheory.com/blog/2022/08/27/concentrated-group-action/

On a side note, though related to manifolds of gravitational fields, the Nobel Prize in Physics is being given this year for essentially this:

http://www.fruechtetheory.com/blog/2014/05/30/quantum-entanglement/

[1] Jackson, J. D., “Classical Electrodynamics, Third Edition”, c. 1999 John David Jackson, John Wiley & Sons, Inc
[2] Griffiths, David J., “Introduction to Electrodynamics, Third Edition”, c. 1999, Prentice-Hall, Inc.
[3] Mackenzie, Kirill C. H., “General Theory of Lie Groupoids and Lie Algebroids”, c. 2005 Kirill C. H. Mackenzie, London Mathematical Society

No responses yet

Mar 29 2022

Transmission of the Coulomb Field

The gamma ray field we live in is extremely rich and dense.  For the forms we find in nuclei and assorted particles, there is all the energy needed to drive all physical processes.

A Calabi-Yau shape within a nucleus or particle needs an external energy supply to maintain it. Gravity provides the energy. Here we are talking about force and pressure within a nucleus or particle, with only indirect connection to the outside, or connection at a point, curve, or surface.  There may also be tears joining and reforming.

Occasionally we refer to neutrons, protons, electrons, and nuclei.  A proton can be a hydrogen nucleus, though we list it separately when we talk about free protons, such as in the solar wind, particle colliders, or elsewhere.  Let’s take an Oxygen nucleus for example with the makings of 8 protons and 8 neutrons. Inside the nucleus, at the top, parachutes with baskets attached through ropes, or strings, instead of a parachutist, may cause some gravitons to loop around the insides of the parachutes, or branes, and into the baskets with enough force to hold the parachutes against the highest flux density of gravitons. Then the gravitons would find ways to tunnel through the baskets, pushed from behind.  In the motions of O2 in air, the parachutes may slide around to stay opposite the maximum flux.

This may also help explain weak interaction parity violation, because as an electron forming within a nucleus tries to escape, out the bottom is easier, due to escape out the top involving going through the gaps in the parachutes.  More than 50% would come out downward.

The manifold of the sun’s gamma ray field, the manifold of the earth’s gamma ray field, and likewise with other celestial bodies, provides a combination of symmetric spaces. During the day, at noon let’s say, the vectors of the sun’s manifold are in the opposite direction as the vectors of the earth’s terrestrial manifold. The Coulomb field uses all vectors of all manifolds to propagate, because all vectors, within a distance of 10 meters at least, are frozen in time for phonon transmission.

Let’s say M1 is the earth’s manifold, and M2 is the combination of the earth’s and sun’s manifolds. “…a diffeomorphism F: M1 → M2 of manifolds oriented by Ω1, Ω2, is orientation-preserving if F*Ω2 = λΩ1, where λ > 0 is a C function on M.” ([1] pg. 209) In our example here, λ > 1, and we have neglected the earth’s moon for simplification.

We may call a negative charge a left coset space, and a positive charge a right coset space. Each creates its own homomorphism in the dense gamma ray field, by a diffeomorphism on the electric fields of the gamma rays.  For one thing, there is circular polarization. For another, perpendicular to the greatest flux density of gamma rays the electric fields of the gamma rays may have skewed sine wave lobes, somewhere between a normal sine wave and a sawtooth. The Coulomb field acts tangent to the R vector sphere, and “(∇XY)p depends not on the vector field X but only on its value Xp at p.” ([1] pg. 309]  The way that the Coulomb field transmits radially is by centrifugal force through the gamma ray field.

The inside of an atom may be called a geodesic.  An electron path in an atomic orbital may also be called a geodesic, and “a long geodesic may not be minimal.” ([2] pg. 62)  This is due to the Lorentz force:

http://www.fruechtetheory.com/blog/2010/12/23/electron-orbitals-and-the-lorentz-force/

Gravity is an integral manifold.  Each orbital arc is a line integral absorbing gravitons.  The Coulomb field, on the other hand, is a charge induced diffeomorphism in the gamma ray field. Substantially outside of neutral atoms there is a propensity for positive and negative charges to cancel, though in the near field we have van der Waals forces.

Phonons for the Coulomb interaction are generated inside a charge.  The field created, that acts on another charge, may act on the outside of another charge, possibly only 5% of the diameter deep.  The fields may also act in the interspace, producing backflush to the charges that generate the fields.  Phonons of opposite chirality attract, and of the same chirality repel.

As points meet for the Coulomb force, the acceleration would be periodic, and relates to the vector potential.  A Fourier Series can be applied to the vector potential, with the direction of force being the side of the ‘x’ axis where the sine or cosine function has larger lobes.  Often a geodesic is called piecewise smooth, due to gravitons being separate, though on a classical scale the motion is smooth.

Two electrons can occupy the same atomic orbital if they have opposite half-integer spin projections.  This is the Pauli exclusion principle.  In terms of tensor math, “the subspaces are mutually orthogonal and each is a nontrivial irreducible subspace.” ([1] pg. 242)

[1] Boothby, William M., An Introduction to Differentiable Manifolds and Riemannian Geometry, Academic Press, 2003

[2] J. Milnor, based on lecture notes by M. Spivak and R. Wells, Morse Theory, Princeton University Press, 1969

No responses yet

Nov 14 2021

Greatest Lower Bound

One would guess that the particle physicists and quantum field theorists may like a 1.3335 x 10-15 m diameter of a free electron, because it is closer to a point particle than many estimates of the diameter.  It is possible that 1.3335 x 10-15 m is also the limit inferior of the sequence S137 to Sn in an atomic orbital.

The maximum diameter, on the other hand, will depend on the element and on the orbital.  At a spin flip, electrons in all orbitals may reduce to 1.3335 x 10-15 m, before taking off on a new trajectory and increasing in diameter again.  We cannot speak of a limit superior of the sequence of diameters of the electron in an atomic orbital nevertheless.  That will depend on the direction of electron travel, and on whether the atom is at the surface of the earth, or at some other planet.  For the latter, it depends on the density of the gravitational field.

We may also ask whether 1.3335 x 10-15 m is the greatest lower bound at all locations in the universe.  This raises the question of whether the fine structure constant is a universal constant, or whether or not the Coulomb gauge is the same everywhere.

2 responses so far

Oct 24 2020

A Number

Published by under Mathematics

Fifteen years ago today I started an attempt to calculate gravity, after coming up with the concept on August 10th of the same year.  With a web search of “diameter of the electron”, reference number 3 of my April 2007 paper was found.  The link does not come in anymore, though there would be other places where Ernest Rutherford’s 1914 publication “The Structure of the Atom” can be found.

Starting with the diameter of the electron as the wavelength of a photon, I used hc/λ to produce an energy in Joules.  In the April 2007 paper it says: “Noticing that this number is on the order of the gravitational constant, it becomes worthwhile to proceed …”.

Sometime in 2007 or 2008 I sent a copy of the paper to Professor Converse Blanchard, with a note in the front thanking him for teaching me physics.  He sent the paper back to me with a cordial note in the front and a few markups throughout the paper.

One marking, at the spot noted above, was: “The grav constant is not an energy, and so this coincidence is without meaning.”  My answer to this is that a number is a number, – it has no units.  It is as Wilfred Kaplan states in Advanced Calculus on page 6: “We stress that det A is a number, …”  Otherwise, in the case of hc/λ we would speak of an “energy” and not a “number”.

It is worth noting that most of Professor Blanchard’s comments were constructive.  Later in the paper, relating to the quark coincidence, he wrote: “amusing!”.

My studies lately have been mostly in mathematics.  I have four books that are specifically on the topic of Advanced Calculus as well as several other math books.  Once in a while, I go back to a physics book and things come back quickly with my old markings and tabs sometimes leading the way.  Can do the same with engineering books, such as that Tds = du + Pdv.

Nineteen days after October 24, 2005, the calculation was made complete with
G = 4hf/3 m3 kg-1 s-2.  As can be seen in the diagram at the top of the blog, the units on the constant 4/3 are m/kg2.

No responses yet