Archive for the 'Quantum Mechanics' Category

Feb 09 2017

E = mc^2

It occurred to me in January or February 2008, during my first foray into Quantum Mechanics, that the reason there is no 1/2 factor in front of mc^2 in Einstein’s formula E=mc^2, – like there is in the Newtonian formula for kinetic energy K. E. = (1/2)mv^2, is that there are gravitons inside a fundamental particle that are bouncing back and forth against gravitational pressure on the outside, which doubles the energy.

One response so far

Feb 24 2016

Johnson–Fruechte Experiment

Produce a multiple layer wire wound coil around a roughly 2 inch diameter iron core, maybe 8 feet long. Set the cardboard tube from a roll of paper towels, on end, up on a shelf. Get as much capacitance as you can hooked up to the coil and charge up the capacitance. Aim the device at the top half of the cardboard tube, making sure the other end ‘sees’ terrestrial earth, and dump the capacitance all at once to produce a high value of current. Gravitons like to follow magnetic field lines, so one would see if the cardboard tube can be pulled over.

A software engineer across the hall from me, Jeff Johnson, who I have worked with for many years, came up with the idea of loading a lot of capacitance, and producing a high current by dumping it with one switch. The wire gauge would have to be figured out based on the current that would be produced.

No responses yet

Dec 23 2015


Published by under Quantum Mechanics

Go to an adhesion seminar, like I did years ago with a fellow engineer, and the speaker may or may not tell you that the main component of adhesion is due to the most fundamental of van der Waals forces, that being dipole-dipole electrostatic attraction, which force falls off at a rate proportional to one over distance to the fourth power. The seminar leader is likely to tell you nevertheless that the surfaces should be clean and dry.

Obviously adhesion can also, and usually does, have a mechanical component. This is especially true in the shear direction when a surface is course, or purposely roughed up first. Pressure is often applied when adhering surfaces to force the adhesive into crevices, for the mechanical component to grab better, and to bring molecules in closer contact for the electrostatic component. If the instructions for the adhesive say to hold the pressure for a certain amount of time at room temperature, that is to let the molecules creep into crevices and to allow the dipoles to move themselves into positions that increase the number of potential energy wells that relate to movement and positioning of the dipoles.

The electrostatic component is strongest in the first 3 or 4 molecular layers of relatively complex adhesive molecules, so this makes it easier to see why pressure helps. The ‘dry’ rule is mostly because water does not make a good adhesive. The ‘clean’ rule is a little more complex. Chemists have made adhesives good at inducing dipoles into relatively non-polar material, but it is best if the material being bonded to has consistent isotropic structure. When the dipoles are setting up the energy wells, it is more efficient when dipoles of a locale ‘see’ a uniform structure across a hemispherical view. Nature prefers mathematical order. Also, an adhesive may stick to a piece of debris, but the piece of debris will probably not stick to the substrate.

Some of the strongest adhesives are solidified by heat curing, when cross linking occurs. If the dipole positions end up more rigid, they can maintain strength under high strain.

For a good description of dipole-dipole bonding, see:

Tipler, Paul A. and Llewellyn, Ralph A., Modern Physics, Sixth Edition, W. H. Freeman and Company, New York, c. 2012, pgs. 387-388

No responses yet

Nov 17 2014

The Pion

Published by under Quantum Mechanics

As an example of one of the several particles that must stay, the pion “has a range of 1 Fermi”.  This is a compression factor of close to 4 compared to a graviton.  It is NOT a graviton, even though it probably was one at an earlier point in time.

The pion is a “mediator of nuclear force.” *


*  R. Shankar, Principles of Quantum Mechanics, Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, c. 1994, pg 366

No responses yet

Jun 24 2014

Macroscopic vs. Atomic G

Dan Fordice sent me two articles about newer experiments that were set up to measure the gravitational constant.  One of the articles referenced a paper by Tino et al. where the constant is determined using one mass type of hundreds of kilograms of tungsten, and the other being laser cooled rubidium atoms.  The apparatus involving the tungsten masses looks like it may be the same apparatus as was used for the Schwarz et al. experiment from 1998 [1].  The Tino et al. value for G is given as 6.667 x 10-11 m3kg-1s-2 [2] with statistical uncertainty and systematic uncertainty given in the paper.

When we have a macroscopic mass where atoms are chemically bonded, and masses are held together by various means, a gravitational field acting on one atom can have a component of force on another atom that is chemically bonded to it.  A single atom free of bonding to other atoms, on the other hand, has fewer instantaneous electron orbital path vectors than a macroscopic mass of several kilograms when we consider it as a whole.  Therefore one would expect that the value of G when measured on individual atoms would be lower than a conventional value of 6.672 x 10-11 m3kg-1s-2 [3].

The gravitational constant based on one third the mass of the proton is 6.6807 x 10-11 m3kg-1s-2, but does it ever get this high in reality?  Planets in orbit around the sun would get close to this value.

G = 6.672 x 10-11 m3kg-1s-2 is probably still a good value to use when considering macroscopic masses on the surface of the earth, or in the atmosphere, or in orbit around the earth.



[1]  Schwarz, Robertson, Niebauer, Faller, “A Free-Fall Determination of the Newtonian Constant of Gravity”, Science, 282, 2230-2234; 1998:

[2]  G. Lamporesi, A. Bertoldi, L Cacciapuoti, M. Prevedelli, G.M. Tino, “Determination of the Newtonian Gravitational Constant Using Atom Interferometry”,, 2013

[3]  Tipler, Paul A., Physics, Worth Publishers, Inc., 1976, inside back cover

No responses yet

May 30 2014

Quantum Entanglement

Published by under Quantum Mechanics

In the news is quantum entanglement, or what Einstein called spooky action at a distance.  Here is one of the articles:

This works by phonon transmission through a gravitational field, which is transmission that is faster than the speed of light.


No responses yet

Sep 01 2011

Fermilab Magnets

With the Fermilab Tevatron shutting down this month, I wonder if its magnets could be used for a space debris vacuum.  The problem pops up in the news periodically, and did again today:

2 responses so far

Jun 09 2011

Internal Conversion

Internal conversion is likely due to a missed spin flip signal from the nucleus, when one or more currents internal to the nucleus are disrupted at an inappropriate time.  One of the places a description is found is in Krane section 10.6.

Looking to the same book, and while it refers to the complete spin-orbit interaction, and not just spin flips, a useful quote here is “the nucleus produces a current loop, which gives rise to a magnetic field at the location of the electron; this magnetic field interacts with the spin magnetic moment µs of the electron …” *.  When it comes to internal conversion then, synchronous timing of a spin flip signal is critical to holding an electron in a quantum orbital, and loss of the signal due to nucleus disruption can allow the electron to take off on a short or long trip to an atmospheric atom, to another planet, to the Andromeda Galaxy, or to be captured in a Van Allen Belt just for a few possibilities.

The higher the principle quantum number, the higher the kinetic energy an electron will have in this process as it takes off.


* Krane, Kenneth, Introductory Nuclear Physics, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1988, Chapter 16, pg 611

No responses yet

May 28 2011

Free Electrons Perfectly Round

Published by under Quantum Mechanics

In a Scientific American article about the electron, the perspective from the piece seems to maintain the electron as “an infinitesimally small point of charge”, and says “it actually drags a cloud of virtual particles around. These fleeting particles pop in and out of existence, and contribute to the electron’s mass and volume.” *

For calculation purposes in quantum mechanics, the electron is sometimes thought of as dimensionless, nevertheless this cloud of virtual particles, popping in and out of existence, can be visualized as conjugate wave gravitons, which do indeed contribute to mass and volume of not only electrons, but also of protons and neutrons.

The research seems to indicate then that a free electron may be a perfect electric monopole.



No responses yet

Apr 16 2011

Space Debris

Published by under Astrophysics,Quantum Mechanics

It occurred to me only today, while studying from Kenneth Krane’s Introductory Nuclear Physics, that it would take pulsed magnetic fields to focus gravitons on space debris or an enemy satellite.  The way magnetic field lines fan out from a pole of a dipole magnet would make the concept otherwise unworkable.  Since protons in the CERN LHC travel very close to the speed of light, that part of the technology would already be available.  There is no cross product in this case, apart from creating the magnetic field pulses.  As far as aiming and tracking accurately and effectively from the ground, one in my position can only guess that this technology is available also.

2 responses so far

Next »