Is the positive and negative charge of the atom in any element, a result of the strong nuclear force? I understand the amount of positive or negative attraction the atom will have is based upon it's subatomic configuration. Is the electromagnetic field energy of the atom a residual effect or secondary wave effect of the strong nuclear force?
No, it's the other way around: the "strong nuclear force" (a form of magnetism) is a result of the "positive" and "negative" charges...
Yordas comment is completely wrong. Don't mind it. Roughly, the positive or negative charge of an atom depends on the ratio protons/electrons. If the atom has more electrons bound than there are protons in the nucleus it is a negative ion, and if the atom has more protons in the nucleus than there are electrons bound it is a positive ion. And so, the charge of an atom is not a result of the strong nuclear force.
You are completely correct. Yordas made several errors when saying: "No, it's the other way around: the "strong nuclear force" (a form of magnetism) is a result of the "positive" and "negative" charges... " It is not "the other way around." The strong nuclear force is one of the four fundamental forces, totally unrelated to magnetism. It binds nuclear particles together independ of their charge. It is very short range - can't even reach (have effect) all the way across larger nuclei. Forces from electric charge have infinite reach, falling off as inverse square. Thus, as one progresses thru the periodic table, from hydrogen to multiple proton elements, the proportion of neutrons tends to increase, because each proton is being repelled by all the other protons and only the relative "near by" neutrons are keepin it from being electrostatically expelled. That is there must be more "near by neutrons" in stable elements. I always use this understanding to remember that it is U235, not U238 which can easily be split in a nuclear reactor. U235 has three less neutrons than U238, the more common isotope of the element with 92 protons. U238 has 92 protons and 146 neutrons. I don't have convenient access to a chart of the isotopes, but think that 8 protons and 8 neutrons (an oxygen isotope) is the last of the nuclei that are stable with only one neutron for each proton. (Please correct me if wrong.) Thus, roughly speaking, the strong nuclear force's reach is approximately the diameter of a oxygen nucleus.
How do you know that the nuclear forces aren't a form of magnetism? What is the nature of the physical atttributes of magnetism that excludes nuclear forces from being a form of magnetism? Geistkiesel
I'm in no way a physics expert, but I have questions. I've been to a site where some hardcore physic's professors went ballistic when I mentioned the mere question of what is the tachyon energy field? I picked up right away that professional physicists do not accept it, but I also understand some experimental cosmologists believe to understand the dynamics of quantum and the tachyon field, it will require a primary shift in the physics paradigm of the universe. The supposition I found in a book, by John Davidson, in his book, "The Secret of the Creative Vacuum", (educated in Cambridge astrophysics and Indian metaphysics), believes the universe is pervaded with a constant wave energy, a low power, but strong long wave "vibration" moving in all directions and dimensions. He equates this vibration as the "Tachyon Energy Field". I don't know the quantum physics to explain the math of it, but new concepts in quantum theory seem to be pointing to a long energy wave pervading the universe...it affects every atom and every subatomic particle, simultaneously and continuously... Curious on opinions, I'm not supporting this one way or the other. However, evidence of a background energy of microlevels above the zero-point, exist when measured within a vacuum, and that power is unaccounted for, and above in the energy required to operate the generating "motor". These devices are patented in many countries, some with power coefficients of +5 greater energy output, than input. The link I'm including is a series of magnetic motors which is expected to be able to operate a factory, and somehow, this Japanese inventor has managed to reduce heat from the motors, thereby increasing energy potential, and the life of the magets. See http://www.gaiaguys.net/Minato.htm
Sorry for the confusion of the long post. Is there a tachyon field? What is it? And is there an example of research that proves it is a form of accessible energy?
All energies are the consequence of only one energy: magnetic energy (ie. MIND). Depending upon the circumstances, this one energy produces such and such a behavior, to which physicists give special names. Gravity for example, is generated because planets spin in synchronized motion. Planets spin because they are complete magnets. We think planets are only attractive because we can't see the replusive effects: their nuclei spin in synchronized fashion, so that they are always in attraction. That's what explains harmony and steadiness in galaxies, and most of all, the fact that planets spin.
Well the common compass needle contrasted with the magnetic spin vector orientation of spin-1 particles after tramsition through inhomogeneous magnetic field/gradient volumes.are two forms of magnetism. Geistkiesel
Yorda, That's the biggest piece of crap I ever heard. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Magnetism is the result of positive and negative charges of like atoms working in unison due to alignment, thus causing an attractive or repelling force upon other similar elements. Planets do spin however their nature is, in time to become despun. Gravity has nothing to do with planet rotation other than a small force of resistance to the rotation of other objects. E=MC2 That is, could the fact that we observe subatomic particles appearing and disappearing within the vacuum of space be the transformation of energy to mass? If this assumption is correct then I would hypothesize that the Universe is under an energy field pressure that fluxuates the energy that is contained within the Universe. This would account for the changing of states form energy to mass. Without going beyond the scope of my question I would like to link the strong Nuclear force to the positive and negative charges of the atom. Not the force of attraction to other atoms due to subatomic makeup only the constant that is the positive and negative force of the polar regions of the atom. My question is, could this force be a secondary wave affect of the atom? What I am looking for is that all subatomic particles exert an energy wave with a vibration that is the square of the mass contained within the subatomic particle, that is the strong nuclear force. When more than one subatomic particles come together their energy wave fields should interact like two stones falling into water at the same time thus creating a secondary wave effect.
Short answer: Magnetic forces and strong forces have entirely different functional variation with separation. Magnetic forces have a range dependance well described by Maxwell's equations. Because magnetic monopoles have probably never been observed Maxwell's equations, as usually written, do not include any magnetic charge density term, but they can be written to include one and remain completely consistent with all observations. The field from a magnetic monopole falls off just like that from an electric charge - monotonically, smoothly as the inverse square. All magnets resemble two separated monopoles, one S and one N type. Again, just like the electric dipole (equal + and - charges separated), the field depends upon the angle between the field point and the dipole axis, and roughly on the inverse cube of the distance. That is, in summary, electro and magnetic forces are governed by Maxwell's equations and have smooth, monotonic decreases with increasing separtions for the field source, but do not cease to exist at any range. The strong force is entirely different. At very short ranges, it is repulsive. If it were to become increasingly attractive as the range decreased, (like the E&M forces) then all mater would be lost into micro black holes (which would essentailly immediately "evaporte" in a burst gamma rays). At distance several time the oxygen nuclear diameter, the strong force does not exist. Not that it is just very weak. IT DOES NOT EXIST. (It depends upon the exchange of more fundamental particles that are not stable and thus have limited ranges, even if travelling at the speed of light.) For separations larger than a proton diameter (approximately) and less than an oxygen nuclear diameter, the strong force is attractive and holds the multi-proton nucleus together. It compresses the nuclear space between neutrons and protons until there is a balance between it and the electro static repulsion amoung the positively charged protons. If the strong forced did not weaken and reverse sign (become repulsive) but continued to increase (as the electric and magnetic forces do) with decreasing separation of the nuclear particles, then this balance between it and the electrostatic repulsion would be imposible. I.e. as stated earlier, nuclear matter would shrink ever more rappidly as the strong force grew stronger - producing the micro black hole and a burst of gamma ray as all matter ceased to exist. That is if the strong force were governed by Maxwell's equations as magnetism is, then matter could not exist. Last time I looked arround, there seemed to some arround. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Yorda (perhaps you?) would not doubt say that "matter is only in my mind" etc. but my world view is so different that I don't attempt to discuss with people disputing the existance of matter, physics facts, etc.
well i know nothing of this field of study but would it make a differnce if the waves were differnet lengths, in order to have that secondary wave effect such as in water, should the eaves be equal lengths, or does that not make a difference? I really dont know maybe some one else can elaborate on that. well just throwing in something that might help
