It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Dirac's equation...and only four elementary particles

page: 1

log in


posted on Jun, 18 2006 @ 12:39 AM
While doing some research for a sci-fi novel I'm writing, I read most of a two part online pdf about Dirac's equation.
Basically, the two articles dealt with the "sea" of negative energy, which Dirac proposed years ago, I believe around the 1930s, whereby possibly all matter is simply composed of only four particles:
1. electron
2. positron
3. negative energy electron
4. negative energy positron
This theory does away with protons, neutrons, and photons, not to mention doing away with most of the leptons. Quarks are essentially missing as well (since protons and neutrons consist of quarks, in certain quark flavors and colors). Gone too are all the force particles (including photons, as mentioned above). The author of these articles believes that electromagnetic radiation simply consists of what he calls "epos" which are electron and positron "pairs" which attract other epos by connecting positive to negative ends, linearly, one pair after another -- this in effect becomes the missing photon particle found in electromagnetic radiation. Within the two articles, the author explains in detail how gravitation, strong nuclear force, and weak nuclear force exist without their force particles as well.

Okay, I know this must sound "out there" and I know it's not the first time someone has proposed some type of theory whereby only electrons/positrons and/or maybe a few other elementary particles are all that's needed to make up physical matter, but, this author really seems to have dotted his i's and crossed his t's. His theory makes a lot of sense.
I've studied particle physics and string theory, and WOW! does the Standard Model and even string theory beg the reader to believe numerous particles are necessary for matter and the universe to function. We're led to believe numerous resonance particles, that barely last for any conceivable time interval, and many quarks and leptons are needed in the Standard Model, while complicated Calabi Yau dimensional spaces are necessary for the vibrations of elementary particle strings, along with complicated, head spinning mathematical equations to have string theory make any proof positive sense.
And when is the Standard Model going to have its Grand Unified Theory? Doesn't look like anytime soon, going the same route most physicists have been following (which may have a lot to do with Heisenberg and his uncertainty principle...see the articles for more)

Doesn't a simple theory seem so much more natural and intuitive? Though sure, we've grown up to believe the standard model of the atom, with its proton, neutron, and electron, many paranormal phenomena, that seems unexplainable from our current view point of physics, could possibly be readily explained by this author's theory. Epos as electromagnetic radiation, and even an ether (yes, I know, that idea was trashed long ago), show great promise in solving how telepathic and telekinetic processes truly work. Trust me, if you read these articles, you'll get a good eureka, it will all make much more sense.

The only thing I have to question in practicality with this author's theory is the numerous tracks left behind from particle collisions (like at CERN)...not sure these tracks can be explained by only four elementary particles alone...

Here are the two urls:

Though I encourage anyone to read these articles, I have to admit that having a basic understanding of physics, especially nuclear and particle physics would help, though, if you love science like me, it really doesn't matter. Read them anyway.

posted on Jun, 18 2006 @ 01:13 AM
Ripples In The Dirac Sea*

I'm just a layman, certainly don't consider myself even an amateur physicist and am thus more of a philosopher about all this than anything, so I recommend considering my opinions, if at all, cum grano salis.

For many years I have found the most appealing model for understanding what physicists are observing in labs and the cosmos to be one which expresses all matter and energy as n-dimensional waveforms in some sort of universal medium.

These waveforms, being more complex than can be described in four dimensions, appear to us only partially as "shadows" or projections of higher order functions constrained by our perceptual -- and intellectual -- limitations.

Thus a "particle" may actually be a "lobe" of a waveform which intersects our perception of space-time, and not actually some solid little bead, or string (itself an intersection), or whatnot.

Just a section of a complex n-dimensional wave.

Among other things, this model resolves the issues of wave-particle duality, entanglement, quanta (as harmonics), matter/energy equivalence, the seemingly endless parade of "new" particles, dark matter/energy and quite a few other problems bugging physicists these days.

Thus I find the framework comfortable for my own conceptions.

But it's just a model, and just my opinion.

*With apologies to Geoffrey A. Landis.

[edit on 6/18/2006 by Majic]

posted on Jun, 18 2006 @ 11:26 AM
Majic I have heard of a similar theory before.
Your theory sounds very interesting though.

I have several questions.
How does this theory explain:
-positive and negative charges?
-electron "orbits" around nucleus (though I am aware that electron orbitals are more like "clouds")?
-electromagnetism and the motion of charges, as in magnetic fields produced by moving charges and electric fields produced by moving magnets?
-intrinsic particle spin and polarity of spin (as in what occurs in MRIs and "flipping" of H protons)?
-ZPE (zero point energy), photon-photon collisions and production of electron-positron pairs or photons suddenly producing "virtual" electron-positron pairs or "virtual" electron-positron pairs suddenly materializing out of a vacuum, based upon uncertainty principle?
-and how does the n-dimensional wave form theory account for telepathic and other psychic communications or occurrences? Does all matter and living beings have connections via waves from "behind the scenes", as in these waves connecting all matter and living beings NOT in our physical realm but through other dimensional realms?

See, in the "epos" theory, it can quickly be seen that we are all closely connected because there is a never ending "stream" of epos from one being to another or from one matter object to another and of course connections from matter to living beings...i.e. all is connected. For instance, imagine that simple experiment to see how a phone line works: two paper cups are connected by their bottom sections to a long string. That way, one person can talk into the cup while the other person, putting his/her cup to the ear, can hear the other person's words. This is a crude representation, but this is basically what is occurring with epos; a line of epos from one person to another, even with thousands (or even millions? billions?) of miles in between can allow communication, through manipulation or alterations of the epo lines.
If you read the articles, you will get more insight into understanding how this can work.
I just really like this theory because of its simplicity.
BUT, I really like theories proposing that all matter is truly just wave forms, like string theory or the theory you mentioned.

Btw, Majic, do you have any urls for n-dimensional theory? I would really like to read more about this!!!


log in