Deep-Gas, Deep Hot Biosphere Theory

If you want look at the basics the photon should be investigated and the Planck connection should be revised to show all photons have the same energy. Fusion and fission are not basic processes in the making of protons so why not figure out how to make a proton. Also there in no need to invent new names for the same old things.

Jim,

Making protons is not a problem, any energetic neutron can do it by releasing a Beta - particle (essentially a high-energy electron). When the beta particle leaves a neutron, the neutron becomes a positively charged proton with mass slightly less (neglible) than the original proton.

MV, Yes,but, where does the neutron come from? Its the old chicken and egg puzzle. It could also be said the photon is made from the proton and the proton is made from photons. Or you could say these things were created in the bigbang and thats that.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by neilderosa</i>

The big problem with fission reactors has been radioactive waste with a long half-life, and how to dispose of it safely. Would that problem be solved here?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Our current fission reactors use U-235 and/or Pu-239. About 2% of the hidden energy in U-235 is released, with the other 98% mass being radioactive waste. For Pu-239, about 2.5 to 3% of the hidden energy is released with rest being radioactive debris. My speculation is that deuterium is two protons fused together, base to base, thus showing the behavior of two neutrons. If you split deuterium, the energy release is 100% and the remains are two hydrogen atoms. No radioactive waste.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by neilderosa</i>

I assume you mean plastics, etc., from petroleum by-products, and natural gas for cooking stoves and camping and such? But rest assured, it will be a long time before enough power generating plants are built using your new method of deuterium fission, or even plutonium fission, to heat American homes.

Your job is probably safe for many years.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

I sincerely hope not. The only obstacle is having the wrong <b>sacred</b> theory. I will refer to recent experiments about this later on.


[/quote]

Gregg Wilson

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by MarkVitrone</i>
<br />Jim,

Making protons is not a problem, any energetic neutron can do it by releasing a Beta - particle (essentially a high-energy electron). When the beta particle leaves a neutron, the neutron becomes a positively charged proton with mass slightly less (neglible) than the original proton.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

There is no evidence that protons are made or unmade. There is no such thing as a stand alone, stable neutron. When a neutron is ejected from a nucleus, it has a half-life of about 10-12 minutes. It undergoes "decomposition" to become a proton and an electron. If the electron phenomena is actually an interaction between a proton and elysons, then the hidden energy mystery is solved.

If we place a proton into a medium of elysons and gravitons, the gravitons will push the elysons up against the proton. Assuming my outrageous claim that Elysium is compressible, then the piled up elysons would become a liquid. But if they are still receiving momentum transfers from gravitons, then the liquid would vaporize.

We do see light being emitted by atoms, including the single proton hydrogen atom. If the proton were a sphere, then every point on the proton surface would have to cause both condensation and vaporization. That is a contradiction. However, if a proton has a different shape, then elysons can condense on a portion of the proton surface and flow "downhill" on the proton surface. When the flow has reached the lowest point on the proton surface, the elysons would be trapped but still receiving momentum input from gravitons. They would vaporize and an electromagnetic wave would be born. No need for an electron being a single particle and orbiting the nucleus. Every action is a push and it is not reversible.

It amazes me that geometry is not considered in fundamental physics - <b>even though the standard model of an atom has geometry!</b> The dimension of geometry is unavoidable. It is real. It is not a part of mathematics but a part of physics.

An asymmetric proton is the singular answer for nuclear fusion, nuclear fission, birth of a solar system, etc. It also answers why a proton can be brought up to high velocity in a particle accelerator. It follows a particular path.

Given an asymmetric shape, I will show how this causes acceleration of a proton within a gravitational flux and an Elysium medium in the next posting. (Chemistry is completely based on geometry.)

Gregg Wilson

Have returned from endless meetings where 12 people "help" me do a process design. Design by committee or by mob doesn't work. Since this is the Terrestrial Science category, I can report that hell is here on Earth.

Starting with the speculation that a proton may be asymmetric in shape in order to show asymmetric behavior, let's look at the Mercedes-Benz ad: "Form follows function". Since protons are already in existence, let's reverse the proverb: "Function follows form". I will speculate that the proton will be asymmetric in only one dimension but symmetrical in the other two dimensions. Furthermore, it will have a convex surface and a concave surface. Examples would be a hollow half sphere or a hollow cone or a hollow half ellipsoid, etc.

Any graviton which impacts on the outer surface will impart some momentum to the proton. Regardless of its trajectory of coming in and going out, another graviton can follow exactly the same path except in the reverse direction. In total, all of these graviton hits will cancel out and the proton will not move (assuming a uniform flux). However, a graviton which collides with the inside of, say a cone, will also impart momentum to the proton, which is toward the tip of the proton (cone). Another graviton, which follows the same path, but in the opposite direction, will also impart forward momentum to the proton. The forward momentums do not cancel one another but add to one another. (Any "sideways" impacts will cancel out because of the symmetry of the proton in the other two dimensions.) The proton will move "forward" but it will be a "drunkards walk".

Let's toss in another proton. Assuming they are in the relative vicinity of one another, they will randomly but progressively shield one another from the gravitational flux - in the direction which is the shortest distance between them. Eventually they will meet, tip to tip (think cones). There is no attractive force; there is no chemical "bond". They are simply in each other's way!

Once joined, the entire body is now symmetric in all three spatial dimensions. In a uniform gravitational flux, there would no longer be any particular movement by the joined protons. Does this description have any relation to Reality?

Well, atomic hydrogen in a vacuum, which has a magnetic field, does in fact split into two, equal streams. Each stream goes to one of the magnetic poles. Molecular hydrogen shows no such behavior. It just sits there.

Second break with mainstream science: if magnetism is simply gravitons which have been co-linearized, then the behavior observed in the actual experiment is explained. Keep in mind, if A affects B, then B affects A. If gravitons can "randomly" affect proton behavior, then protons can "randomly" affect graviton behavior. I assume that readers do know that magnets do have a geometry.

Think about a vast nebula having not only a massive number of protons but also having a vast number of elysons. Perhaps many more than we assume.....

Gregg Wilson