Atomic nucleus
After some 20 years of tireless dedication to his in depth research on unification, Nassim Haramein’s most recent scientific paper, The Schwarzschild Proton, received an award at the University of Liege, Belgium during the 9th International Conference CASYS’09 (Computing Anticipatory Systems).
Chosen by a panel of 11 peer reviewers, Haramein’s paper won the prestigious Best Paper Award in the field of “Physics, Quantum Mechanics, Relativity, Field Theory, and Gravitation.” This significant paper marks a new paradigm in the world of quantum theory, as it describes the nuclei of an atom as a mini black hole, where protons are attracted to each other by gravitation rather than some mysterious undefined strong force. This radical new view of the quantum world produces a unification of the forces and appropriately predicts measured values for the nucleon of atoms.
In his Crossing the Event Horizon presentations Haramein claims that the problem in current physics relates to the belief that gravity is a weak force, which goes back to the structure of the atom, where all of the problems started. In studying the atom, physicists were confused when they found a very dense positive nuclei in the center of the atom, which defied their theory of mass and then they found the negative electrons surrounding the atom that had a constant spin without losing energy and showed no signs of entropy. This created the first problem and instead of resolving it through Newtonian physics, they created quantum physics with new forces and particles.
Under Newtonian physics if you put positive particles together, they repel each other. However, in the nuclei of the atom, it has the dense structure of a black hole in the vacuum, but physicists did not consider gravity as the natural force to hold this dense mass together. So instead of re-investigating gravity as a stronger force, which would have resolved the structural issue, they created new forces called the strong and weak forces and added gluons to hold it all together. The simplicity of the structure of nature therefore, eluded them causing major fundamental errors which have been compounded over the years.
In order to resolve the original mistake in calculating the structure of the atom, a relationship between gravity and the electromagnetic force had to be established. Haramein realized that interaction of gravity as a force and the electromagnetic grid as a force, flowing and contracting in relationship, refer to an implosion side and an explosion side. This illustrates the dynamic synergy of the structure of the universe, which is always in motion. In physics this motion is acknowledged as it applies to gravity which is the contracting force, and the electromagnetic has been acknowledged as the radiation force. Applying this relationship to the structure of a black hole in any size shows that the extra forces that were created are not necessary.
The next step was to look at the structure of the nuclei of atoms. Haramein demonstrates that the nuclei of atoms can be described as mini black holes, replacing the need for an ad hoc strong force with no source of energy to define its strength, with the gravitational force of a mini black hole extracting energy from the vacuum.
In The Schwarzschild Proton paper, Haramein examines some of the fundamental issues related to black hole physics and the amount of potential energy available from the vacuum. He finds that only a very small percentage of the vacuum fluctuations available within a proton volume need to be cohered and converted to mass-energy in order for the proton to meet the Schwarzschild condition for a black hole. This Schwarzschild condition proton has a mass approximately 38 orders of magnitude higher than the standard proton mass.
Examining then the role of the strong nuclear force relative to the gravitational forces between two Schwarzschild protons, he comes to the conclusion that the gravitational component is adequate for confinement. In the standard model the strong force is typically given as 38 to 39 orders of magnitude stronger than the gravitational force. However, the origin of the energy necessary to produce such a force is not given. Remarkably, a Schwarzschild proton with 38 orders of magnitude higher mass than the standard proton, produces a gravitational effect strong enough to confine both the protons and the quarks.
This approach gives the source of the binding energy as spacetime curvature resulting from a slight interaction of the proton with the vacuum fluctuations. As such it offers a unification from cosmological objects to atomic nuclei. Therefore, it is possible to write a scaling law to find that the Schwarzschild proton falls appropriately within the mass distribution of organized matter in the universe.
Haramein finaly calculates the magnetic moment of such a Schwarzschild proton system and he finds it to be a close approximation to the measured value for the so-called anomalous magnetic moment of the proton.
With The Schwarzschild Proton paper, Haramein has presented evidence that the proton may be considered as a black hole and that such a system predicts remarkably well, even under crude approximations utilizing semi-classical mechanics, its interaction time, its radiation emissions, its magnetic moment, and even the origin of the strong force as a gravitational component. The Schwarzschild proton strongly suggests that matter at many scales may be organized by black holes and black hole-like phenomena and thereby lead to a scale unification of the fundamental forces and matter.
(See also White whole / black whole structures)
Tags: Energy, Haramein, Matter, Paradigm, Physics, Quantum, Scale, Science, Spacetime, Universe
Email
RSS
Twitter
Quantum Gravity Unification of Strong Nuclear Force
Video about Nassim Haramein’s paper on “The Schwarzschild Proton” – a unification of the Strong and Gravitational Forces.
See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D8IcciRHGvQ
I agree entirely with the idea that the nucleus of an atom is in fact a miniature Black Hole. I wrote a paper some years back, Unified theory, thoroughly explaining this very concept within the context of a broader, Unified Theory. I believe you will find the read quite interesting if not enlightening. Paper can be read at http://www.light-cards.com/unified%20theory.html. Joe DiMino.
how fractality causes gravity
what nassim got right..
http://www.goldenmean.info/gravityislove
.. and wrong..
I had read in the 70s that for Infintesmally short periods of time subatomic particles approached the mass of the Universe. Harameins article indicates that the period of time is not Infintesmally Sort in duration.
Since this is postulated as a theory, then as such it requires a (set of) HYPOTHOSES to be examined and proved true or false and to what degree plus or minus. Within the description in the Video with all the clear clear math there appear to be sets of Hypotheses, and hopefully a bubble chamber proof will be looked into. (I am not sceptical at all, but this is out of my league)
I’d like to segue to the 19.47 ”Harmonic on a Sphere” from a Tetrahedron incised in a Sphere. Upon viewing Harameins claims, the skeptic in me HAD to me go to my Handy Dandy coffee table sized Atlas and find the Latitudes Nassim claims.
Basically they all panned out.
I could not find the latitude for Jupiters Giant Red Spot (my father breathed his last breath – from old age – just as the Comet was striking Jupiters surface)But the Red Spot appears to be in the general area of 19ºLatitude.
Ditto the 25 mile high volcano (and almost only volcano) on Mars – Olypus Mons.
Next, in my Atlas, i found Mexico city (where a World View Paradigm shift was forced at gunpoint) and it sits at 19.25º.
The Great Pyramid of Cholula, which is 90% larger than The Great Pyramid of Egypt, is at 19.05 and the Pyramid of the Sun is at 19.4º and it’s base is 2.09% shorter than is the base of the Great Pyramid of Egypt.
Mauna Kea, on Hawaii’s largest island — ten miles above the Sea Floor — has it’s peak at 19.49.
The Earth is not a perfect Sphere, so these small descrepancies from the ideal of → 19.47 is, as far as i am concerned, SPOT ON. So Haramein’s claims in these areas, are in fact correct. . . Now, do I personally feel this is Coincidence? No, THESE ARE NOT ALL COINCIDENCES ! !
Bear in mind that these mountainous”Anomalies” are the LARGEST Surface anomalies on Jupiter, Mars and on Earth.
Before i first heard of this from Nassim and then double checked is was QUITE SKEPTICAL. ”Ancients just fumbling with pretty regular objects” — not so.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9ZYFsP4rJs
all imagination and coincidence?
[...] Fonte [...]
Could the shrinking proton observation be explained by the mini black hole theory when a muon is substituted for an electron as indicated below?
Incredible shrinking proton raises eyebrows
15:35 07 July 2010 by Kate McAlpine
How big is a proton? The most accurate measurement yet suggests it’s smaller than we thought. This could be due to an error – or it might just hint at totally new particle physics.
“The new experiment presents a puzzle with no obvious candidate for an explanation,” says Peter Mohr of the international Committee on Data for Science and Technology (CODATA), which calculates values for fundamental constants in physics, who was not involved in the new work.
Like most quantum objects, a proton is fuzzy around the edges. Its size is defined by the extent of its positive charge rather than a crisp physical boundary. This charge radius cannot be measured directly but can be inferred from the hydrogen atom, which consists of a proton and an electron.
The electron can sit in a variety of energy “shells”, each with a different distribution in space. One shell’s distribution requires the electron to dive in and out of the proton, and another sits entirely outside the proton. The energies of both of these shells can be combined to deduce the proton’s radius, using a theory known as quantum electrodynamics (QED).
Muonic atoms
There is a way to make this measurement even more accurate, though: replace the electron with a muon. This particle is also negatively charged but much larger than the electron, so its energy shells sit closer in and overlap more with the proton radius.
Creating such a “muonic atom” has been on the to-do list since 1969, says Randolf Pohl of the Max Planck Institute of Quantum Optics in Garching, Germany, when it was first proposed as a test for QED. But the starting point for the experiment – the muon’s second-to-lowest shell – persists for much less than a microsecond under ordinary conditions, which is not enough time to measure its energy.
Pohl and his colleagues only recently developed a set-up that allows them to prolong that state and measure the proton’s radius using muonic atoms.
‘Impossible’ error
They fed slow-moving muons into a container of diffuse hydrogen gas, at one-thousandth of the pressure of the atmosphere. As the muons latched on to hydrogen nuclei, they started out in high energy shells.
Most of them dropped straight to the lowest energy shell, but 1 in 100 fell only as far as the second-lowest shell. The team then had a microsecond-long window to hit these electrons with a laser pulse tuned to exactly the frequency needed to push them up into the next shell and measure its energy.
To their surprise, when they combined this measurement with the energy of the shell below, their calculations revealed a proton radius of 0.84184 femtometres, less than a trillionth of a millimetre and a whopping 4 per cent smaller than that gleaned using the hydrogen atom.
This is a much bigger discrepancy between the two experimental results than expected. “The relevant theorists tell us that an error of such a magnitude is ‘impossible’,” says Pohl.
New physics?
Mohr reckons the problem is likely to lie with an error in one of the measurements; either that of the hydrogen atom or the muonic atom, or with an error in the calculations.
Savely Karshenboim, also a CODATA member at the Max Planck Institute of Quantum Optics, is betting on an error in the muonic atom study because it “contradicts another convincing result”.
If such errors are ruled out, however, the discrepancy would point to a problem with QED, a theory that underpins much of particle physics. That deficiency opens the door to new physics at work in atoms, such as previously unknown particles.
Pohl stands by his experimental result, but cautions against leaping to this conclusion. “New physics can of course always be used to explain any discrepancy, but before such a claim can be made, a lot of hard work is ahead.”
Journal reference: Nature, DOI: 10.1038/nature09250
Nassim Haramein: We Are All One [2011]
Nassim Haramein presents at Project Camelot Awake And Aware Conference his newest research from his lifelong journey of unifying the fields of all sciences. He has a new paper getting published soon that gives us the equation that proves we are all ONE.
See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1JDMToJDe0