physics feed

(pictures and images with some relativistic equations and my theories)

Neutrino isn't a particle

Saturday, March 26, 2011 9:59:37 PM

, , , , , , ,

"Tonight I decided to publish my theory about Neutrino particle for the first time!" (i don't know english very well but i will do my best!)
________________________

lets have a little breakthrough!.
We can not Detect the Neutrino particle, this is because "Neutrino isn't a particle!"
yes its true why not?!

But the basic Question is,
if Neutrino isn't a particle so "What is Neutrino?"
The reason that we can not answer to this Question is that "we don't know exactly, what is Proton!"
is not completely conclusive, But a Proton composed of two Up Quark and one Down Quark

and a Neutron composed of one Up Quark and two Down Quarks

a Quark is an elementary particle and a fundamental constituent of matter, Quarks combine to from composite particles called Hadrons, the must stable of which are Protons and Neutrons, the components of atomic Nucleons.
Due to a phenomenon know as color confinement, "Quarks are never found in isolation".
they can only be found with in Hadrons, for this important reason, much of what is known about Quarks has been drawn from observations of the Hadrons themselves...etc.
the quark model was independently proposed by Physicists Murray Gell-Mann and George Zweig in "1964".
but the Neutrino was first postulated in "1930" by Wolfgang Pauli to preserve the conservation of energy, momentum and angular momentum in Beta Decay.

this means that the Neutrino theory written prior Quarks theory so this is a Wrong theory, because written without regard to Quarks model.
up and down Quarks have the lowest masses of all Quarks.
"the heavier Quarks rapidly change into Up and Down Quarks" through a process of particle decay, the transformation from a higher mass state to a lower mass state...etc.
now we have very simple Questions.
"why Neutron is heavier than proton?"
if answer is Neutrino so
"why we can not detect neutrino!?"
  1. Perhaps in future we will reveal the neutrinos particles
    or
  2. Neutrino isn't particle so the reason that Neutron is heavier than of proton isn't Neutrino!.

according to the Quarks model, Quarks bending energy in Hadrons are variable, i believe that "Quarks bending energy in Neutron is Less than Proton",
this is the reason that Neutron is heavier than proton.

infact, "Electron kinetic energy after collision with the Proton converted to Quarks rest energy inside the Neutron".

so we don't need to define Neutrino particle for preserve the conservation energy!.
and i can proved it just with relativity theory!.


e+p°→n
e°+k=n°-p°
k=(n°-p°-e°)
e°(γ-1)=(n°-p°-e°)
γ=1+(n°-p°-e°)/e°
β=(1-1/γ²)^½
Pe=e°γβ/c

γ=2.531409704
β=0.918665295
k=e°(γ-1)=0.782Mev
Pe=e°γβ/c=1.188Mev/c

(eº,p°,n°)rest energy electron,proton,neutron
γ→relativistic factor of electron (lorentz factor)
β→speed parameter of electron
Pe→electron momentum
c→speed of the light
v→speed of the electron
β=v/c



e→pº | n→ ,n²=nº²+Pn²c²
e+pº=n ,e²=eº²+Pe²c²
e²+pº²+2epº=n² ,Pn²c²=Pe²c²

eº²+P²c²+pº²+2epº=nº²+P²c²
e=(nº²-pº²-eº²)/2pº

γ=e/eº
β=√(1-1/γ²)
β=v/c

Pe=eºγβ/c
Ke=e-eº=eº(γ-1)


Beta decay
nº→p+e
p²=pº²+Pp²c²=pº²+P²c²
e²=eº²+Pe²c²=eº²+P²c²
Pe=Pp=P

nº=p+e ,nº²=pº²+eº²+2P²c²+2pe
½(nº²-eº²-pº²)-P²c²=pe
{½(nº²-eº²-pº²)=x}
(x-P²c²)²=(pº²+P²c²)(eº²+P²c²)
x²-2xP²c²=pº²eº²+P²c²(eº²+pº²)
x²-pº²eº²=P²c²(2x+eº²+pº²)
{(2x+eº²+pº²)=nº²}
P²c²=(x²-pº²eº²)/nº²

P=1.18752Mev/c
e=√(eº²+P²c²)
γ=e/eº=2.52994
β=√(1-1/γ²)=0.91857
Ke=(e-eº)=eº(γ-1)
Ke=0.78180Mev
Kp=0.00075Mev

nº=pº+eº+Ke+Kp
As you can see in the beta decay, neutrino can be considered Total kinetic energy of the proton and electron

_______________________
Resource:
en.wikipedia.org
and
www.desy.de ←for last image

neutrino electroneasteinstein - Neutrino isn't a particle

Comments

Unregistered user Monday, March 28, 2011 8:20:09 AM

Justin writes: This is an incredible idea ever!!! i think you're a genius!. Neutrino, The Ghost Particle, isn't a Particle! Wow! Whats your name easteinstein?!

Unregistered user Monday, March 28, 2011 8:46:53 AM

robert a writes: unbelievable breakthrough!

Unregistered user Monday, March 28, 2011 8:51:14 AM

Anonymous writes: Your Physics is much much better than of your English language

Unregistered user Monday, March 28, 2011 8:20:41 PM

Anonymous writes: We can detect neutrinos though, there are three types and they are massive (in the order of eV or meV). Did it not cross your mind that the down quark is heavier than the up quark? If you're going to disprove the existence of neutrinos, you are going to have to do more than some basic energy conservation; you will have to completely rewrite the standard model. A lot of electroweak physics involves neutrino interactions. What is your substitute theory? You need two fermions lines in an interaction vertex (ignoring the 3 and 4 boson vertices). {In fact I'm not sure what your calculation "proves" at all. All you did was state an energy difference is the rest masses and give a random electron momentum} repaly: I got proof that neutrino could be electron kinetic energy

Unregistered user Tuesday, March 29, 2011 12:01:31 AM

Anonymous writes: you mean Neutrino Doesn't exist!

Unregistered user Tuesday, March 29, 2011 8:26:48 AM

David writes: Wow! this is Non-understandable theory that i heard ever

Unregistered user Tuesday, March 29, 2011 2:17:20 PM

Tyler writes: Can someone tell me that this theory is true or not!? i'm really confused! γ=1/√(1-v²/c²) Ee=√(E0²+Pe²c²) k=Ee-E0 I think this theory according to the theory of relativity that i know! is correct! And if this theory is correct The most bizarre theory will be born

Unregistered user Tuesday, March 29, 2011 2:30:27 PM

emma writes: Your order is that the Wolfgang Pauli theory about Neutrinos particles is wrong!?

Unregistered user Wednesday, March 30, 2011 12:35:57 AM

Anonymous writes: i can not understand even a word!

Unregistered user Wednesday, March 30, 2011 8:31:02 AM

james writes: wired

Unregistered user Wednesday, April 27, 2011 9:31:29 AM

Anonymous writes: your science is terrible. absolutely terrible. Listen to the person who posted a long post above refuting your claim, he's doing good science >easteinstein:Yep

Unregistered user Friday, April 29, 2011 5:12:00 PM

David Mills writes: I do not know much about physics but maybe this theory is correct because, When Galileo said the Earth isn't the center of the universe all People! around the world! at that time Imagine the earth is center of the universe! and the pope! commuted this sentence to house arrest! at Galileo's home near Florence for the remaining eight! years ....

Unregistered user Wednesday, May 11, 2011 7:25:10 AM

Dan writes: Did you actually prove that the difference between rest mass of neutrons and protons can be A relativistic electron With relativistic factor (lorentz factor ) approximately 2.5 i think that this theory is very better than neutrino or ghost! particle theory. but seriously what is your name? and where are you from?! i'm dan and im from newyork So not too hard to introduce youself!

Unregistered user Wednesday, May 11, 2011 7:55:50 AM

Nate writes: if this theory is correct all neutrinos in all generations isnt particle!. LEPTONS (spin 1/2) lepton/charge/mass/lifetime/principal decays// first generation e/-1/0.511/--/--// υe/0/0/--/--// second generation μ/-1/105.659/2.197x10^-6/e,υμ,υe// υμ/0/0/--/--// Third generation τ/-1/1785/3.3x10^-13/μ,υτ,υμ'e,υτ,υe'ρ,υτ// υτ/0/0/--/--// This means that υe is kinetic energy of e, υμ is kinetic energy of μ, υτ is kinetic energy of τ, i think this theory could be true!

Unregistered user Wednesday, May 11, 2011 12:29:07 PM

Anonymous writes: if neutrino isn't a particle so the 2012 movie will not happen!?

Unregistered user Wednesday, May 11, 2011 12:32:20 PM

sarah writes: i knew that :D!

Unregistered user Thursday, May 12, 2011 9:16:40 AM

Anonymous writes: I'm an old physicist, I am glad that before I die, I saw this beautiful theory!. just a blind physicist cant understand that this theory is correct!. This theory is consistent with the Standard Model. But you need a little more work on it.

Unregistered user Thursday, May 12, 2011 9:24:12 AM

rodriguez writes: Maybe both theories are correct!

Unregistered user Thursday, May 12, 2011 9:30:03 AM

Anonymous writes: 理論が正しいことを

Unregistered user Thursday, May 12, 2011 10:04:03 AM

Anonymous writes: if this theory is correct, great physicists like Wolfgang Pauli, Clyde Cowan, Frederick Reines, Leon Lederman, Melvin Schwartz and Jack Steinberger will take the challenge!.

Unregistered user Friday, May 20, 2011 7:52:19 AM

Gilbert writes: you mean, neutrino in beta decay=electron kinetic energy+proton kinetic energy!?

Unregistered user Wednesday, May 25, 2011 12:38:55 PM

Anonymous writes: I never heard something about this theory!.

Unregistered user Sunday, June 12, 2011 6:43:44 PM

rasul writes: i think this theory is Brilliant idea, but you will have to completely rewrite the standard model.

Unregistered user Thursday, June 23, 2011 1:17:31 PM

Wow! writes: you mean ke+kp=neutrino !?

Unregistered user Tuesday, July 26, 2011 12:11:31 PM

Anonymous writes: "Viele der elektroschwachen physicsinvolves Neutrino- Wechselwirkungen. Sie benötigen zwei Fermionen Zeilen in einer Wechselwirkung Scheitelpunkt (ohne Berücksichtigung der 3 und 4-Boson Ecken)" 1. elektroschwachen physicsinvolves Neutrino interactions. 2. zwei Fermionen Zeilen in einer Wechselwirkung Vertex.

Unregistered user Sunday, February 12, 2012 8:12:20 PM

Anonymous writes: it getting harder when they said: neutrino is faster than light!. maybe this is the reason that you could prove with relativity theory neutrino is not a particle

Unregistered user Thursday, March 8, 2012 2:46:44 PM

goddamn particle writes: Did CERN's neutrinos break the cosmic madness limit? Faulty wiring...

Write a comment

New comments have been disabled for this post.