A Defect in Mass Defect, Revised By: Miles Pelton, March 2014 The conclusions expressed herein are derived from reasoned reconsideration of documented observations of scientific studies. Principally the work of Galileo. The Leaning Tower of Pizza demonstration resulted in the conclusion that the force of gravity is in proportion to the amount of fundamental material in an object and not on the objects size, density or type material. Knowledge regarding the composition of matter was extremely limited at the time so the specific component of matter responsible for controlling the behavior of gravity was not established. It is now understood that there is a particle common and elementary to all matter and reasoned consideration drives the conclusion that particle is the common denominator that explains the conclusions drawn by Galileo with one condition. For a common denominator particle to dictate the behavior of gravity as concluded by Galileo, the power that produces gravity must be uniform in strength and must be inherent in each particle. Considering the conclusion that the power to produce gravity is inherent in each common denominator elementary particle (EP) drives the conclusion that every assembly of matter produces gravitational attraction of another assembly with the force applied in proportion to the number of EP in the object attracted. Also, evidence establishes that the gravitational power applied by an object is the collective sum of the power of all EP in the attracting assembly. In other words an assembly develops a center of gravity with the power to attract equal to the number of EP in the assembly but it is the individual EP of the attracted assembly that are attracted. It is by that means that power applied to attract is in proportion to the number of EP in the attracted object yet also in proportion to the number of EP in the attracting object. However; the energy intensity available at the center of gravity available to attract EP of a second object is the amount of intensity remaining after the EP of the attracting object have been bound. The amount of force applied, ergo the amount of energy intensity applied, in binding a specific EP is diminished as the distance squared. For example, in a helium atom where the distance from its center of gravity to its own EP is relatively short, meaning near full intensity would be applied, little intensity remains with which to attract the EP of other objects. A helium atom’s contribution to the gravitational attraction between objects would be very little. Meanwhile, an object the size of the earth would have considerable attraction intensity remaining to attract external objects. However, the remaining intensity would not be representative of the mass of the earth. Further; the “electromagnetic” binding between protons affects the spacing (distance) involved in the formation of matter and that would modify the gravitational force producing intensity of an object. Therefore, the use of gravitational or electromagnetic attraction to establish the mass of an object, especially at atomic and sub-atomic size, would not produce meaningful results. The method used in establishing the Periodic Table of the Elements is not definitively explained but is subject to question. The explanation given for the term “mass” as used in science is unclear although it is apparently believed to refer to the amount of energy contained by an object. That part of the term referred to as “rest mass” is apparently derived from the objects reaction to gravitational force by establishing the magnitude of energy required to accelerate the object but it is not clear how that is determined or how that correlates with the amount of energy the object contains. While EP contain energy the amount of energy contained and available to be released by an object is the energy employed in binding the components to make the object. In other words, EP can neither be created nor destroyed so the energy inherent in EP is not released when the object is disassembled. As explained, there is a relationship between the number of EP and the intensity of the objects center of gravity but the intensity, the magnitude of energy, cannot be reliably determined by measuring the gravitational force, the weight, or the electromagnetic force produced. The only definitive correlation is to the number of EP involved wherein one unit of energy intensity exists in the center of gravity of each object for each EP. However; gravitational attraction bonds cannot be broken. The energy that produces gravitation is an inherent component of each EP so is never released. The only energy available for release when an object is disassembled is the lines of force produced by protons, the electromagnetic force. But, the amount of energy applied in binding an object (say an atom) is not related to the number of EP but rather the number of proton/electron bonds and the intensity applied to forming each bond, which means after adjustment for distance. The number of bonds in just one atom can be staggering. Consider one helium atom that involves two protons and two neutrons. The three quarks of each proton each bind their own 612 EP plus each quark center of gravity binds the EP of the other two quarks. Then the center of gravity of the assembled quarks (a proton) with an intensity of 1,836 EP units, binds each of the 1,836 EP in the three quarks. Then the same thing happens with the second proton. Then the center of gravity of the helium atom with an intensity formed by the EP of two protons and two neutrons (7,344 EP units) binds each EP. Therefore, with the help of basic mathematics, a helium atom involves 1,836 bonds at 612 units of intensity, 3,672 bonds at 1,836 intensity, times two, plus 7,344 bonds at 7,344 intensity. And there is a helium atom at the core of every larger size atom. It would take a little more complex math to calculate the number bonds and intensity of the energy applied for an atom of say U-236. The point being made is that the current term mass does not accurately define or explain the amount of energy involved in making an object or that is available for release upon disassembly. It is suggested that the mass (energy) must be calculated for each element in the manner explained if the term is to serve any useful purpose. However, when recognized that the energy inherent in matter is supplied through EP that can neither be created nor destroyed and not through the conservation of energy concept where mass is believed to be created by “converting” energy and energy is believed to be created by “converting” mass, there really is no need for the term. Incidentally; the force produced by the motion of an object can be and should be calculated independent of “rest mass” since the circumstances prevailing at the point of consideration dictate the force involved. For example, a given object moving in response to the attraction of a galaxy has greater force potential than it would if moving in response to the earth’s attraction. Taken into context, it is time for the scientific community, especially those who profess to be interested in understanding physics, to realize that the principles (beliefs) developed based upon the conservation of energy law are make believe. Physicists are not living with reality but a fantasy land created by mathematics.
Posted on: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 12:32:04 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015