Download Particle Consistency of Microscopic and Macroscopic

Particle Consistency of Microscopic and Macroscopic Motion
Yongfeng Yang
Bureau of Water Resources of Shandong Province, Jinan, Shandong Province, China,
Mailing address: Shandong Water Resources Department, No. 127 Lishan Road, Jinan,
Shandong Province, China, 250014
Tel. and fax: +86-531-8697-4362
E-mail: [email protected]
Abstract
The scenario of particle has been extensively written in the past, but its incompleteness is
serious enough to break the connection of microscopic and macroscopic world. The 19th
century’s cathode rays experiments by Perrin and Thomson are unable to prove whether the
cathode rays are negatively charged or not. Here we propose, the subatomic and elementary
particles in an atom through a capture pattern are organized in a series of hierarchical
two-body systems to orbit, particle wave feature demonstrated in previous double-slit
interference experiment may be explained as an aggregation of successive group movement
of many fine particles. Along with other work, it is hopeful to see that all matter and motion
may be classified into a final frame of hierarchical two-body gravitation.
1 Introduction
Some basic conceptions of microscopic particles had been founded in the past. Electron is
negatively charged, while proton is positively charged, and the number of electron and proton
of an atom is equal, the atom is neutral. There are four kinds of interactions: electromagnetic
force, weak force, strong force, and gravity force, the electrons and protons of an atom are
attracted with electromagnetic force, and the electrons in one atom are also attracted to the
protons in another with electromagnetic force, strong force binds all the protons (including
quarks) of an atom together, weak force is responsible for the decay of massive quarks and
leptons into lighter quarks and leptons, gravity force is weak and relevant at large distance.
However, not all the conceptions are complete in both theory and experiment. First of all, a
celestial object is evidently a large aggregation of countless atoms (this point is presently
certain), and in its body every atom is tightly adjacent to other atoms. If the electrons of one
atom can attract the protons of another adjacent atom with electromagnetic force, all the
atoms in a celestial object may successively attract each other to fix together, it is unnecessary
to employ gravity force to work. But experience tells us that it is gravity force rather than
other to bind all the material (atoms) of a celestial object together. On the other hand, if the
electromagnetic force between the electrons of one atom and the protons of another adjacent
atom is existent, the electrons in motion can repeatedly approach and depart from the nucleus
of another adjacent atom where it includes protons and neutrons, this is a motion in variable
electromagnetic field, the conversion of kinetic energy and potential energy will lead to an
1 instability of any two adjacent atoms; Secondly, C. F. du Fay in 1733 showed a two-fluid
theory of vitreous and resinous electricity, but in 1839 Michael Faraday believed the division
of static electricity, current electricity, and bioelectricity to be only a consequence of the
behavior of a single kind of electricity appearing in opposite polarities. It is not certain which
polarity is called positive and which is called negative. Benjamin Franklin latterly considered
that when matter contained too little of the fluid it was "negatively" charged, and when it had
an excess it was "positively" charged, and further identified the term "positive" with vitreous
electricity and "negative" with resinous electricity. It may see from these descriptions that the
term “positive” and “negative” charge is completely arbitrary and has no any real physical
meaning. So, there is no reason to conclude that the interaction between negatively charged
electrons and positively charged protons in an atom can make the atom become electrically
neutral. On the other hand, proton is experimentally observed to be composed of smaller
elementary particles, and electron is also considered to be one of a large number of
elementary particles, it is difficult to imagine why the magnitude of electric charge hold by
electron and hold by proton is always equal in an atom when these elementary particles are
organized to form this atom. No physical reason may be found to approve this equality; lastly,
also the most importantly, it is uncertain that the particles of the cathode rays are negatively
electrified. In 1897 Thomson made the experiment of cathode rays. The rays from the cathode
pass through two slits subsequently, they then travel between two parallel aluminium plates
and fall on the end of the tube to produce a narrow well-defined phosphorescent patch. The
rays were deflected when the two aluminium plates were connected with the terminals of a
battery of small storage cells. Based on this result, Thomson concluded that these
“corpuscles”--particles are negatively charged. It seems like difficult to disprove the
conclusion of this experiment, but it does not mean that the experiment itself is perfect. The
experiment of electricity through a metal conductor shows that the moving electrons create
current, and electrons move from the cathode of an electric source to the anode. This further
means that electrons have trend to escape from the anode of an electric source under the effect
of potential difference, if the anode and cathode of an electric source is connected with a
metal wire, electrons will immediately move along the wire. It is highly possible that in
Thomson’s experiment some electrons had moved from the battery to the plate connected at
the cathode and then escaped from here, the ejected electrons would collide with the passing
cathode rays and thereby arouse them to deflex. We need to pay attention to the setting of
Thomson’s experiment. Thomson employed a battery of small storage cells whose potential
difference is low, the two plates are near that is apart at a distance of 1.5 cm, the aluminium
plate is about 5 cm. long by 2 broad. These conditions mean, if some electrons (or other fine
particles) are emitted from the plate connected with the cathode, the electron density per unit
area from the plate (relative to the dense cathode rays) is too low to arouse experimenter to
note that these electrons are passing between the two plates. The direction of current is
generally thought to be run from the anode of an electric source to the cathode, but inversely
the movement of electrons is from the cathode to the anode. It is possible that the direction of
electron movement and current is thought by Thomson to be identical, and thus likely mislead
his experimental conclusion. In fact, Thomson’s experiment is to reinforce the view of Jean
Perrin that the cathode rays are charged with negative electricity. Perrin in 1895 had made the
experiment of cathode rays. The cathode rays are emitted from the cathode to pass through
2 two openings subsequently, and then enter a Faraday’s cylinder, the electroscope connected
with the cylinder immediately indicates negative electricity. Similarly, this experiment cannot
prove the cathode rays to be negatively charged. We know, the Faraday’ cylinder Perrin
employed is metal material, and it is already known by the public that there are free electrons
in metal material, so when the particles of cathode rays are emitted from the cathode to enter
the Faraday’s cylinder, they can inevitably bombard the free electrons in the Faraday's
cylinder to move, the moving electrons may further create current and therefore be detected
by the electroscope connected with the cylinder. Because the movement of electrons is
reverse to the direction of current, the electroscope may thus indicate negative electricity. It is
necessary to remind that in both Perrin and Thomson’s experiments they used magnetic field
to deflex the cathode rays, this may be explained as a consequence of magnetic particle
colliding the cathode rays.
2 Proposition
How do subatomic particles and elementary particles orbit in atom? It appears to be
already known by scientific community, but the fact is not so. So far, nobody has in person
seen an actual motion of electron orbiting the nucleus of an atom, the term “spin” is nearly an
arbitrary mathematical description of the movement of these particles, mysterious veil of
atom is still covered. If elementary particles are building bricks, and then how do they
initially work to form large structures? In another previous paper, I have theoretically
formulated that all particles due to random perturbation continue to capture each other to form
large structures [1]. Here I further specify this process in microscopic scale. Due to random
perturbation, elementary particles in motion have chance to approach each other. Once the
distance of two particles is near enough, gravity fixes them together to form a two-body
system. Due to the distribution of elementary particles are extensive in space, many two-body
systems of particles are formed at the same time. Due to random perturbation, these two-body
systems of particles and individual particles continue to approach each other and further
capture to form superior two-body systems of particles. The superior two-body systems of
particles and individual particles continue to approach and capture each other to form very
superior two-body systems of particles. We define these very superior two-body systems of
particles to be atoms. Subsequently, atoms and particles due to random perturbation continue
to approach and capture each other to form some single celestial objects, and then these
celestial objects due to random perturbation continue to approach and capture each other to
form planetary systems, stellar systems, etc. (Fig.1). As all particles are aggregated together
through a pattern of one to one, they are automatically organized in a series of hierarchical
two-body systems to orbit. As stated in previous paper that under the effect of gravitation, the
two components of each two-body system are approaching progressively [1]. A successive
hierarchical approach between all particles of an atom leads them to fall towards a central
region and may thus form a nucleus. In the interior of an atom, every particle is orbiting
around the barycenter of a two-body system, and at the same time the two-body system itself
is orbiting around the barycenter of a superior two-body system. As the nucleus is massive,
the barycenters of related two-body systems are geometrically determined to be close to the
nucleus, the outer particles therefore look like orbiting around the nucleus. This is similar to
the solar system, in which planets look like orbiting around the Sun. The approach of two
particles may eventually give rise to collide, and thereby arouse atom to radiate rays and
3 decay.
Figure 1: A model building from different hierarchical bricks. In atom level, the color
dots denote elementary particles and their associations. Arrows denote the motional directions
of each component and two-body systems, black dots denote the barycenter of related
two-body systems, while black lines denote gravitation between the components of these
two-body systems, dashed circle denotes the boundary of each level structure.
3 A particle’s explanation of double-slit interference experiment
The most famous experiment to prove the property of particle to be wave-like is
double-slit interference experiment. We here propose, this wave property, is essentially an
aggregation of the movement of many fine particles. As shown in Figure 2, we at first
assumed that particle emission from a source is by group, and that the time interval of two
adjacent groups is so short that it is unable to be distinguished by current technique. Let all
the groups of particles pass through slit a in board S1 subsequently. The width of slit is
assumed to be far larger than the size of individual particle. In the course of passing through
the slit, the particles can compress and collide with the side of the slit. After the slit, the first
group of particles will immediately release into a large space and thereby spread out forward,
and then the second, third, fourth, etc. groups of particles will by order pass through the slit
and spread out forward. The spread of particles is like a sphere-layer pattern. And then, the
first group of particles reach board S2 where there are two slits b and c. Some of the particles
continue to pass through the two slits. After the two slits, the two subordinate groups of
particles will again release into large space and spread out forward. The following subordinate
groups of particles will subsequently release and spread out forward. In motion, a subordinate
group of particles from one slit will geometrically intersect with other subordinate groups of
particles from another slit. For instance, subordinate group b1 from slit b can intersect with
4 group c1, c2, etc. from slit c. Now if we put a screen (F) in the front of these particles, the
intersections of the subordinate groups of particles will automatically fall on the screen. An
intersection of particles means there are more particles in this intersection than in other
non-intersection. So, when the intersections of all subordinate groups of particles fall on the
screen, a series of patches may be formed. If the particles we employ here are photons, the
result of double-slit interference may be received. It can be inferred that the difference
between the distance of a slit to one intersection and the distance of this slit to another
adjacent intersection is always constant, which is equal to the product of the time interval of
two adjacent groups of particles and the spread velocity of these particles, namely L1 - L2 =△t
×V (where L1 and L2 are respectively the distance of slit c to intersection K1 and K2, △t is
the time interval of two adjacent groups of particles, V is the spread velocity of particles). The
discrete particles mean there must be time interval between any two adjacent particles when
emitted from a source subsequently. If the expectation from this theoretical model may be
confirmed, it may act as a landmark to treat the result of double-slit interference experiment
as particle property. Note that water wave is also a consequence of the movements of fine
water molecules (particles). When a pool of water is suddenly beat, the water particles at the
beating origin begin to vibrate up and down, the vibrating water particles further drag
adjacent water particles to vibrate, the vibration of these adjacent water particles then drag
other adjacent water particles to vibrate, by order, a successive vibration of water particles
leads a wave-like feature to be spread forward.
Figure 2: A particle’s explanation of double-slit interference experiment. K1 (K2, K3)
denotes the intersection regions of two subordinate groups of particles on the screen. c1, c2,
etc and b1, b2, etc denote the spread of the subordinate groups of particles from slit c and b,
respectively. L1, L2, and L3 denote the distance slit c to intersection region K1, K2, and K3,
respectively.
5 4 Discussion
Thomson in the experiment employed an electrostatic field to deflex the cathode rays,
but we should note that the electrostatic field itself is controlled by an electric source, and that
the two polarities (anode and cathode) of the electric source are being connected with two
plates to create this electrostatic field. As electrons often move from the cathode of an electric
source to the anode, this means that some kind of matter is passing the two plates to create the
electrostatic field. It may infer that this kind of matter is either electrons or other fine particles
that are bombarded by electrons to eject from the plate. If someone desires to prove the
cathode rays to be negatively charged, he should use a plate coated with so-called positive
charge to approach the cathode rays to see whether the rays can be deflexed. Ernest
Rutherford in 1910 used Helium nuclei to bombard a piece of gold foil to show that the
majority of an atom’s body is empty, except for a small but dense nucleus at the center. This
means that there is a huge void between any two adjacent atoms in the gold foil, even though
they are very close in distance. In a galaxy, there is a large void between any two adjacent
stellar systems (stars), but the mass of each stellar system is mainly focused at a small central
region. Stellar system is often composed of many single components like star, planet, and
satellite, atom is also composed of many single components like electron, proton, and neutron.
This similarity suggests that they are likely to be built through a same physical process. If a
galaxy is imagined to be a piece of gold foil, and then the stars in this galaxy may be treated
as the atoms in the gold foil, and then the planets and satellites of a star may be treated as the
elementary particles of an atom.
Some people must argue that “spin” may describe the movement of subatomic and
elementary particles well. Here I must remind of you that the Stern-Gerlach Experiment has
an uncertainty in confirming electron to be “spin”. If magnetic field is thought to be a
consequence of the movement of some kind of fine particles, the weird shape of the magnets
designed by Setrn and Gerlach may make these fine particles move unusually in space, by
which they may collide the passing electron beam to split. This possibility is theoretically
existent, but Setrn and Gerlach did not consider this point because they in the experiment had
completely neglected the influence from the weird shape of the magnets. So, if we only
ascribe this detached behavior in the electron beam to be the “spin”- electron revolving
around its axis, the evidence is not enough. In the past decades, researchers had successfully
suspended some non-magnetic objects (a sumo wrestler of 142 kg, and a frog, for instance) in
the midair by means of unusual magnetic field. This inspires us to connect the Stern-Gerlach
Experiment and these suspending experiments together. A common point is these researchers
in the experiments generally employed unusual shaped magnet (magnetic field) to work. It is
easy for us to think the split of electron beam and the suspending of non-magnetic object
could be a consequence of fine particles from unusual shaped magnet (magnetic field)
colliding these objects to move. On the other hand, it appears to be clear that the term “spin”
is currently not more than an arbitrary mathematical description of the movement of small
particles, an observable definition is still vague.
Undoubtedly, cluster is an aggregation of independent galaxies, galaxy is an aggregation
of independent stellar systems, stellar system is an aggregation of a star and planetary systems,
planetary system is an aggregation of a planet and satellites, star, planet, and satellite are also
an aggregation of countless atoms, respectively, and atom is an aggregation of elementary
6 particles. All these different hierarchical structures are in motion at the same time. If
elementary particles are bricks, we have reason to believe, a hierarchical two-body capture is
the only way to build these bricks to form large structures, and then all the structures are
inevitably organized in a series of hierarchical two-body systems to orbit. As force is the
reason of motion and motion is the aftermath of force, this naturally requires a hierarchical
two-body force to fit.
Since 1950’s, many people had made great effort to try to unify microscopic and
macroscopic world, but none of them is successful. The neglect of the hierarchy of matter and
motion could be the cause of this failure. In recent years, it is hopeful to see that the
compatibility of relativity theory and quantum mechanics have begun to be considered, a
deeper but underlying theory is being appealed by scientific community. If electron is
proved to be neutral, proton must be neutral, strong force must be inexistent, electromagnetic
force between electrons and protons must be inexistent, too. It is already known that, not all
matter have a property of electromagnetism, but all matter commonly have weightiness, this
means that they may be ruled by a common gravitation. For instance, a piece of magnet has
both weightiness and magnetism, its magnetism may make it attract other objects, but
obviously it is fixed on the Earth with gravitation but not with magnetic force, therefore it
may classify electromagnetism as a special property of some kind of matter. And then all
known matter and their motion may be written into a final frame of hierarchical two-body
gravitation.
Reference:
[1] Yang, Y. F., Motions of Observable Structures Ruled by Hierarchical Two-Body
Gravitation in the Universe. Proceedings of the 18th annual conference of the NPA, College
Park, Maryland University, USA, Vol.8: 712-721 (2011). viXra: 1010.0042v8.
7