Modern physics recognizes four so called fundamental forces:
1. Electromagnetic force.
2. Gravitational force.
3. Weak nuclear force.
4. Strong nuclear force.
I have already shown that gravity is a form of electromagnetic interaction (see companion paper entitled Electrogravitics, parts 1, 2, and 3).
The weak nuclear force is responsible for beta decay, the process that transforms a neutron into a proton, electron and anti-neutrino. In other words, the weak nuclear force appears to transmute matter.
Unlike electromagnetic interactions, the strong nuclear force has a very limited range, approximately the diameter of a proton. Furthermore it is always an attractive force, and since it can bind protons together in opposition to coulomb repulsion, it appears to be stronger than electromagnetic forces. How are we to unify these two wildly disparate nuclear forces with electromagnetism and gravity? This is the question I shall endeavor to answer. I shall start with the weak nuclear force.
Bosons and Fermions:
All subatomic particles can be categorized as either Bosons or Fermions, depending on their intrinsic angular momentum (spin) as defined by Eq. 1.
Fermions have half integer quantum spin numbers (n = 1/2, 3/2, 5/2, ...).
Bosons have integer quantum spin numbers (n = 1, 2, 3, ...).
Electrons, protons, neutrons, and neutrinos are some examples of Fermions. Photons and gravitons are some examples of Bosons. As we shall see, Bosons and Fermions exhibit radically different behavior.
The exclusion principal:
Fermions obey the Fermi-Dirac statistics, while Bosons obey the Bose-Einstein statistics. The Fermi-Dirac statistics require that Fermions must conform to the Pauli exclusion principal which states "two Fermions can NOT occupy the same quantum state at the same time". Bosons are exempt from Pauli's exclusion principal, and therefore an unlimited number of Bosons can occupy the same quantum state at the same time. The distinction between Bosons and Fermions has very real consequences. Normal matter exists because electrons are Fermions and following the Pauli exclusion principal, electrons must occupy successive shells around the nucleus. A Laser can produce coherent mono-chromatic light because photons are Bosons and therefore can all occupy the same state at the same time.
Under the right conditions, two independent Fermions (such as electrons) can combine to create a composite Boson. This concept was first "discovered" in 1956 by Leon Cooper and is known as "cooper pairing". It is pivotal to the BCS (Bardeen, Cooper, Schrieffer) theory of superconductivity. Other examples of composite Boson phenomena are 4He super fluids and Bose-Einstein condensates. In all cases, the composite Bosons are exempt from the Pauli exclusion principal (1.2.2).
Since it is not deflected by uniform magnetic or electric fields, the neutron appears to be electrically neutral, yet just like the electron and proton it possesses a magnetic dipole. Neutrons are created by the fusion process in stars. Under immense pressure and temperature, a proton and electron are fused together forming a neutron and a spin half integer packet of energy called a neutrino. During a stellar collapse, this fusion process can convert a sizable fraction of the entire star to neutrons, producing as a result a so called neutron star. Neutrons are only conditionally stable. While stable in most atomic nucleus and the interior of neutron stars, a solitary neutron will decay with a half-life of just 15 minutes, producing as decay products, a proton, electron and anti-neutrino. It is the weak nuclear force that is responsible for neutron decay. The neutron creation and decay process can be summarized as follows:
While the current vogue in particle physics assumes the neutron is composed of quarks, Eq. 2 and Eq. 3 indicate the neutron is composed of nothing but a proton and an electron, minus a half integer spin packet of energy (the neutrino). From this perspective, the neutron would appear to represent a degenerate from of hydrogen atom. In other words, a hydrogen atom minus a half integer spin packet of energy (the neutrino).
Since hydrogen is composed of a proton, and an electron, we could choose to rewrite Eq. 2 as follows:
This rewrite (Eq. 4) raises two very interesting questions:
1. Where did the spin half integer packet of energy (neutrino) come from?
2. Why is the diameter of the resultant neutron (based on scattering experiments) approximately equal to that of the proton 10-15 meters, when the diameter of the hydrogen atom is 10-10 meters (100,000 times larger)?
As it turns out, these two questions are intimately related. It should be obvious the half integer spin packet of energy (neutrino) must come from the electron orbit, since it is the only source of non-intrinsic spin available within the hydrogen atom. Therefore the normal hydrogen electron orbit angular momentum (spin) of:
Degenerates, thereby becoming:
And in so doing, liberates a half integer spin packet of energy (neutrino). This process also defines the neutrino as being electromagnetic in composition. Therefore we could visualize the neutrino as being the half integer spin cousin of the integer spin photon, both being packets of electromagnetic energy, differing in nothing more than intrinsic angular momentum (spin). Furthermore, since the electron orbit is now a half integer spin (Fermionic) structure (Eq. 6), it will form a cooper pair with the electron's intrinsic half integer spin, thereby becoming a composite Boson (1.2.3). And since Bosons are exempt from the exclusion principal (1.2.2), the radius of degenerate hydrogen (based on scattering experiments) collapses to that of a bare proton. We now see how a single principal (Pauli exclusion) links the two apparently disparate questions posed above.
Our degenerate hydrogen atom has the observed characteristics of a neutron listed in 1.3.1. It's electrically neutral and therefore not deflected by a uniform electric or magnetic field, yet retains a magnetic dipole. It's apparent diameter is that of a proton, and like the proton has a half integer net angular momentum (spin) as defined by Eq. 1.
In light of our degenerate hydrogen hypothesis, the equation (Eq. 3 above) describing neutron decay has an obvious flaw. If we assume the electron is destroyed in creating the neutron (quark theory), then Eq. 3 is correct. However, if we assume the electron is only hidden by virtue of having become a composite Boson (1.3.2), then the correct equation for neutron decay is:
In retrospect, the confusion over the role and nature of the neutrino was inevitable, given the method of it's discovery and subsequent investigation. The process of beta (neutron) decay in nuclear reactors was observed to produce electrons (called beta particles) with a wide spectrum of velocities. If all neutrons were alike, then either conservation of energy was being violated (very unlikely), or a third entity must be involved in the decay process, such that energy was being arbitrarily partitioned between the electron and the third entity. Scientists named this elusive "third entity" the neutrino. At the time, it seemed only logical to assume neutrinos were being created rather than consumed by the beta (neutron) decay process. And since electrons (beta particles) seemed to be spontaneously created in the decay process (another violation of conservation). The logical conclusion was that neutrinos being created by beta decay were in fact, anti-neutrinos, and complimented the spontaneous electron creation, thereby solving the violation of conservation issue. When taken altogether, a rather neat and tidy hypothesis (aside from being exactly backwards).
As our degenerate hydrogen model (1.3.2) and Eq. 7 clearly show, anti-neutrinos are not CREATED by beta (neutron) decay, instead neutrinos are CONSUMED by beta decay. The neutrino, like it's spin one cousin the photon, is it's own anti-particle. Furthermore, the neutrino being an electromagnetic packet of energy , (like the photon), must have a zero rest mass.
One last detail is required to complete our picture of weak nuclear force interactions. Neutrons are composite entities (1.3.1, 1.3.2, 1.3.3) and require energy (high pressure and temperature) in their creation. Yet the very process of neutron creation generates the seeds of their destruction, since for every neutron in existence, there must also be a neutrino (1.3.2 Eq. 4). And because the process of neutron generation is endothermic, it follows that beta (neutron) decay is exothermic, requiring nothing more than a chance encounter with a neutrino to liberate the energy of the neutron's creation and thereby regenerate the hydrogen atom from whence it came.
Since a sizable fraction of the total mass of the universe is locked up as neutrons, there must be a neutrino flux of truly awesome proportions echoing throughout the universe as the result of neutron creation. It's estimated that every second, many millions of neutrinos pass through the period at the end of this sentence. This begs the question. Given the enormous neutrino flux permeating the universe, why is the neutron stable within the confines of atomic nuclei?
Just as photons initiate electron orbital transitions in ordinary atoms, if and only if the photon energy exactly matches the orbital transition energy, so do neutrino-neutron interactions require an exact match of energy. Because space behaves in a non-linear manner under the influence of large electromagnetic fields (see companion paper entitled Electrodynamic Space parts 1 & 2) the neutrons in atomic nuclei are effectively decoupled from the energy spectrum of most common neutrino sources. However as size of atomic nuclei increase, the orbital transition energy of the neutrons (electron orbits in degenerate hydrogen atoms) starts to overlap the energy spectrum of neutrinos generated by stellar fusion, with the predictable result of beta decay (decreasing atomic stability).
A second and more subtle process contributes to neutron stability within atomic nuclei. This process is degenerate electron orbital resonance within the collection of protons and neutrons that comprise the nucleus. It is analogous to the stabilizing effect of electron resonance within a benzene molecule caused by the de-localizing of valence electrons within the ring. In a similar manner, degenerate electron orbits within the nucleus are also de-localized. Therefore atomic nuclei with even numbers of nucleons are more stable than nuclei with odd numbers of nucleons. For this reason 238U is more stable than 235U, even though 238U has a greater overlap with the stellar neutrino energy spectrum. This also explains the difference in stability between 2H (deuterium) and 3H (tritium) as well as the general lack of stability in low atomic weight, neutron rich nuclei.
The weak nuclear force:
As we now see, the weak nuclear force responsible for beta (neutron) decay, is a half integer spin manifestation of the electromagnetic field (1.3.2). It is mediated by the neutrino, the half integer spin counter part of the spin one photon (1.3.3). Both have a zero rest mass, and travel at the speed of light. Furthermore, the method of unification I have presented herein has the added utility of being symmetrical with respect to neutrino creation and annihilation Eq. 2, and Eq. 7 (unlike conventional quark theory). And since conservation is the most fundamental rule of our universe, this "added utility" is not easily dismissed.
That neutrons are a degenerate form of hydrogen (1.3.2). That the neutrino, responsible for mediating the weak nuclear force is a half integer spin packet of electromagnetic energy (1.3.2, 1.3.3). That the process of neutrino creation and annihilation is symmetrical (Eq. 2 & Eq. 7). That beta (neutron) decay is caused by the absorption of a neutrino, NOT the liberation of an anti-neutrino (1.3.3, 1.3.4). That many puzzling aspects of nuclear decay can be easily explained by a non-linear electrodynamic space interacting with an electromagnetic based neutrino (1.3.4). That the weak nuclear force is an expression of the electro-magnetic field (1.3.3, 1.3.5). In part 2, we shall unify the strong nuclear force, and in part 3, we shall examine some practical engineering applications.
The Unified Field, Part 1