Next: Where are the Bosons? Up: Quarks and other Elementary Previous: Neutron and neutrino V Contents
Which brings a whole new question of its own: what is the nature of the interaction between T and V at the macro level? At the micro-level (known in Standard Models as "Strong Force") T and V of the correct phase results in an attractive force that can keep particles comprised of both types of matter (up and down quarks) bonded together in orbit around each other. At the macro level, T-anti-T attraction is known as an electrical charge. What can V-anti-V be called, and what about T-to-V?
The working hypothesis at the top of the list is that V charge is magnetic. It would be somewhat ironic to have this confirmed, given that magnetism is typically thought of as a "flux" - a flow. Taking into account the hypothesis that neutrinos orbit neutrons, the further implications are that neutrinos jump (in the direction of the magnetic "flux") in exactly the same way that electrons jump between protons when an electrical field is applied.
A definition of the difference between the electric and magnetic field is that:
"in the production of the Lorenz force a force from a magnetic field on a charged particle is generally due to the charged particle's movement whilst the force imparted by an electrical field on a charged particle is not due to the charged particle's movement".
Furthermore:
"the movement creating the magnetic field in ferromagnets is the electron spin, whereas in a current-carrying wire (electromagnets) the movement is due to electrons moving through the wire".
A clarification of the above is in the units: the difference between the units of the two types of fields is metres per second. Electric charge is measured in Newtons per coulomb; magnetic field is measured in Newtons per coulomb divided by metres per second.
Question. Why is the electron spinning in the first place, and, if it is spinning, what effect is that having on the surrounding V-charged matter? We surmise that the answer is: the spin of the electron is linked directly (both ways - one can influence the other) to neighbouring V-charged matter in a fashion where the change of relative position in one effects movement at right-angles in the other. In the case where one type is bonded into an orbital arrangement, that relative change in position of one would cause rotation in the other. Likewise, when electrons move through a wire, we surmise that neighbouring V-charged matter also spins. In other words, one is inextricably linked to the other in ways that make it frustratingly and paradoxically hard to prove... or even disprove!
How come this has never even been considered before? The answer lies in the nature of electro-magnetism. If without fail in absolutely 100% of all observations ever made of the link between electricity and magnetism, the right hand motor rule has never been broken - ever - and the cause and effect has each and every time the electron (or any other particle deemed to have been determined to have an electrical charge) is the one observable object at the centre of the investigations, what would the logical conclusion be?
If anyone dared to suggest that there was even anything other than electrons involved in the effect created by magnetism they had better have a damn good reason to do so. Unfortunately, due to that exact same causal inference reflecting the fundamental reality and sub-structure - namely that T and V particles are inextricably mathematically linked - it is almost impossible to come up with one.
There are however some avenues to explore. The first is to create a Periodic Table mirror chart of neutrino shells according to the number of neutrons in atoms, then to examine the non-magnetic, magnetic, paramagnetic, diamagnetic, ferrimagnetic and other properties of existing well-known elements. If this hypothesis is correct, patterns in the periodic table would clearly stand out.
The second is a refinement of the above. If magnetism is truly an artefact related to neutron shells (an example hypothesis to prove or disprove would be that "only an element with a spare neutrino in its shell and a spare electron is a magnetic material", whilst another would be "an element with one too many neutrinos in a shell whilst having a spare electron is a diamagnetic material") then it would make sense to examine the isotopes of various materials, both magnetic and non-magnetic, to see if there is any variation in their properties. It would be interesting to know, either way, if isotopes (basically containing a different number of neutrons) happen to have exactly the same magnetic (or non-magnetic) properties of the more common variants of the same element, or if those properties are indeed different. If the magnetic properties of elements were exclusively related to the electron shells, then, assuming no difference in those shells due to the number of protons remaining the same, there should be no change in the magnetic properties of those isotopes, either.
The third is related to a question of what happens when electrons jump energy levels, either between shells or escaping and emitting a photon. If electrons jump, then so should neutrinos. So why, if an electron jumps and emits a photon, would a neutrino not do likewise? Are there any circumstances under which an electron jumps but a neutrino would, theoretically, stay? Are there any under which it would not? Are there any circumstances under which the reverse occurs i.e. the energy of an electron jumping is absorbed by a neutrino, such that a photon's emission is less, or even zero? The most likely place to begin examining these kinds of questions is in the field of electronics - specifically diodes and transistors, due to the known quantum tunnelling effects. Has the magnetic field surrounding each side of a transistor or a diode ever been investigated or measured, for example? Is there an anomalous variation in the magnetic flux field that cannot fully be accounted for?
The fourth possibility is to explore the effect of strong magnetic fields on Pion and Kaon particles, including changes in magnetic fields. The reason for this is because Pion+, Pion- (and Kaon) particles have both T and V unit charges. Although it is hard to say exactly what would happen, one possible hypothesis to test would include looking for a relationship between the half life of a Pion+ and the strength of the magnetic field it was in. If the rate of spin of the Pion+ can be influenced, as is expected hypothetically by the application of a strong magnetic field, then this would be quite likely to have a direct effect on the stability of the Pion+. Whether that effect could extend or reduce the lifetime is unknown: either way or even if there is no effect at all it would be fascinating to find out.
All of these questions are ones which simply never have been raised, because nobody thought to question the 100% causal link between electricity and magnetism vis-a-vis the electron. If no anomalies can be found, then good scientific investigation will have been carried out. If anomalies are however found, then that could ultimately lead to a deeper understanding of magnetism - potentially one sufficient to provide a sound basis for increasing the learning rate and discovery process surrounding superconductors, semiconductors and materials science in general. An advance in the theoretical basis for exploring the relationships between atoms and molecules would be a significant addition to the foundations of chemistry in general, especially when considered from the perspective, if the logic in this paper is sound, that chemistry would effectively have been missing half the picture!