It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Protons are smaller than we thought...could the entire universe be wrong?

page: 2
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 09:47 AM
link   
reply to post by micpsi
 



1. something is wrong with quantum electrodynamics, which is used to calculate the Rydberg constant and quantum corrections to it. This is highly unlikely, as the theory is the best one physicists have and it has been tested to hold up to a high level of accuracy;


I'm confused... If the maths was initially wrong, then would not all subsequent calculations based on the erroneous maths be wrong as well? In so much, where is this high level of accuracy coming from?


2. the Rydberg constant itself, calculated from the spectra of atoms, has the wrong value. This would invalidate the work over dozens of years of thousands of physicists, requiring drastic revision - again unthinkable to most of them;


Understandably they wouldn't want their theories to be wrong, but as good scientists they should accept that our maths is not infallible and humans are prone to error.


3. the assumption implicit in the calculations used in QED to calculate the charge radius of the proton from its high-energy scattering form factor is that quarks are point-like. This assumption is wrong if quarks are extended bound states of several more fundamental particles. This is what I predicted in 1979 in a research paper published in Physics Letters, vol 84B, p. 133. In fact, I proved that the observed, approximate t^(-2) behaviour of the proton magnetic form factor (t = square of momentum transfer) could be due to Lorentz contraction of both finite-sized proton and quark wavepackets, indicative of composite quarks, which my paper predicted.


Is there a link or is this published online somewhere for review? What exactly are the implications involved in regards to QM? Would a smaller finer matter structure to atoms below the quark/gluon level possibly give us a better understanding of what is going on at such small scales?




posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 09:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Thill
reply to post by micpsi
 



Glad to have somebody with the scientific knowledge hop in to the discussion , and thank You for trying to form a explanation of the findings.



I'm happy to make a contribution. You know, I have seen some of these science news stories just disappear from ATS because few here realized how earth-shattering or headache-creating some of these experimental discoveries have been for physicists (e.g., Fermilab's recent MINOS experiment, which found that the masses of antineutrinos seem to differ significantly from their counterpart neutrinos - revolutionary stuff, because it contradicts the fundamental CPT theorem and brings into question whether neutrino oscillations are Lorentz-invariant, as predicted in general by Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity). It just goes to prove that progress in physics often comes from small, unexplainable discrepancies.



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 05:27 PM
link   
To anybody who thinks this 4% is no big deal do some research about atoms, protons, electrons muons etc. This universe and all life within it owe their existence to some very specific parameters. Now we are beginning to find that our knowkedge of those parameters are off and that therefore so is our science. This is far from trivial.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Originally posted by stirling
Even a BROKEN universe is right twice a day....
.......................................isnt it?


Haha! It is indeed. Even a stopped clock is...

For those with blank faces perhaps this quote will help:-

We came on holiday by mistake.

And if you still don't know you must hang your head in shame.



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 05:54 PM
link   
Science will eventually discover that all matter is in fact nothing but sound, emanating from the source ( God ) and that really we are just some mighty beings words ...spoken into reality.

Imagine it like a great historical figure like Darwin saying the word "Evolution" and then teams of scientist's trying to figure out the vibrations and what they are made up of and where they come from when in fact the real message is the word itself.



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 11:34 AM
link   
reply to post by mazzroth
 


In all honesty... that's probably the best and most 'reasonable' attempt to merge the spiritual deistic views with that of Quantum Physics.

As difficult/impossible to prove as it may be... but, still - serves as a very good analogy.

In either case - the implications of this are pretty deep. Having particles at work within quark/gluon levels will pretty much shatter everything we thought we knew. String theory and holographic theories are going to be rushing to see how this all plugs in and interacts with their models.

It will be interesting to see how this will influence our understanding of the fundamental forces, as well.



new topics

top topics
 
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join