Thoughts on Substrate Magnetons & The Necessary Revolution in Physics III

Magnetism art by Ling Meng

To really address the interaction of phenomena of any kind assuming a Universal Substrate of the kind suggested by this theorist, we will, first, have to conquer the internal relationships between the different particles of this Substrate, as they have so far been devised.

For, though they are all dual, mutually-orbiting particles with only Lepton components, they constitute two very different sizes.

The 'Neutritron' as we call it has been found in accelerators and named Positronium

The Neutritrons

The initially devised Neutritron is considered to be composed of a mutually-orbiting pair - consisting of one electron and one positron. So, this is a very tiny particle, even as a mutually-orbiting pair. For, compared even with the smallest atom - Hydrogen, it is extremely tiny - each of its components being only one two-thousandth the size of the proton nucleus of that atom, and a very much smaller proportion of the size of the Hydrogen atom as a whole.

It is so small that it will, without any difficulty, completely-occupy the "insides" of both that and indeed all other atoms - there will be piles of room. So, there will be a set-of-different-relations between the components of the Atom and these included Neutritron units of the Substrate.

The MOST Substrate-affecting part of such an atom will undoubtedly be the orbiting-electron. Indeed, any established Paving, of the neutritrons, will certainly be, at least temporarily dissociated by the oft-repeated passage of this particle, around its orbit.

And, once so dissociated, collections of these now freely-moving substrate-units could also be turned into associated vortices. And these would be of a special type, as the repeated orbiting would allow energy transfers BOTH WAYS - that is TO the vortices from the orbiting electron, and also FROM the vortices back to the orbiting electron.

Indeed, elsewhere, this has suggested an alternative Theory of Quantized Orbits (within the Atom).

The Magnetons

Now the two magneton units of the Substrate, though also mutually-orbiting, Majorana-type pairs of Leptons, are both different in size and in properties.

The larger sub-unit in each of the two magnetons involved - either of the Tau or the anti Tau, are TWICE as big as the Proton, while the smaller units - the Muon and anti Muon, though smaller than the Taus are still much bigger than the electron and the positron.

These much-larger joint-particles, because of their differently-sized components, also have magnetic moments. So, both these features limit the presence of these substrate particles within to the Atoms. They are simply too big, and too individually-active (both in their movements and their magnetic effects) to exist, in a stable manner, within atoms. But, as described in their definitions, they can cease their normally-mobile existence, if attracted by Charged Particles, or by magnets, when they form either static Fields or linked as "Lines-of-Force".

Now clearly, whatever the undisturbed nature of all these Substrate Particles, they will be significantly affected by, say. the energetic passage through them by a Charged Particle. [Indeed, the above reference to the affect on neutritrons by the orbiting electron within an atom, already gives an idea of how they will be affected in a quiescent part of the Substrate]

Certainly, the always weak interconnections of neutritrons in a Paving, will be dissociated, and the forming into vortices will then be possible. Yet once the disturbance has passed, there will be a slow, reformation back into their prior stable Paving-arrangement.

Indeed, though, in spite of these local-and-temporary effects, the Paving-pattern will still dominate, across vast areas of what used to be called Empty Space, while, elsewhere, a patchwork of paving-areas with temporary dissociated areas, involving both Streams and Vortices, will also occur.

NOTE: There will always be relatively straight propagations via these neutritron units, as continuously-connected regions of Paving, which will always be available too.

The magnetons, with their normally random movements, and no available stable structure, will be merely be given extra Kinetic Energy by the disturbing passage of a traversing particle, but they will be significantly-structured by gathering around a charged particle - to deliver "its Field", or reformed into linked "Lines-of-Force" strings, by the presence of a strong magnetic effect.

Ling Meng

Let us briefly recapitulate the performance of this complex Substrate. When undisturbed it is undetectable!

All its units, either singly in the case of neutritrons, or over-populations, in the case of randomly-moving magnetons, are neutral in every way, and hence are undetectable by the usual means.

But, they can both affect things, and be affected-by things, that can interact with their various features.

For example, the Propagation of Electromagnetic Energy in Quanta is possible by the bucket-brigade, temporary promotion of the internal orbits, in sequence, across adjacent units. While, the presence of a charged particle will allow magnetons to gather around them, in concentric, aligned shells, to produce a field, and a magnetic presence will line up magnetons into Lines-of-Force continuous with the physical cause of the magnetic effect.

In special circumstances, such as within atoms, neutritron Paving can be dissociated, allowing them to move freely, and be turned into separate vortices by orbiting electrons, and via the repeated interactions, thereafter, will only allow quantized orbits to be possible.

Thoughts on Substrate Magnetons & The Necessary Revolution in Physics II

Magnetic Fields by Berenice Abbott

Now, perhaps, a start can be made in explaining the experiment achieved at Princeton - supposedly involving the emergence of Majorana Particles, via this theorist's (Jim Schofield) definition of a Universal Substrate, and the role of some of its Units in delivering both Electrical fields around charged particles, and Magnetic fields, with "Lines-of-Force" - associated with the presence of permanent magnets.

As it happened, the Neutritron - the first-devised Universal Substrate particle, was originally conceived-of to explain the anomalies of the Double Slit Experiments, as well as many other phenomena - such as Pair Productions and Pair Annihilations, and, of course, Electromagnetic Energy Propagation via quanta: but they, I'm afraid, could not explain Fields at all.

Each Neutritron consists of a mutually-orbiting pair of one ordinary-matter electron, and one antimatter positron - in other words a kind of Majorana particle.

So, the extra particles that needed to be added to the Universal Substrate, to possibly deliver Fields, were also devised as Majorana particles, but this time of differently sized components to endow them with magnetic moments.

Once again, the components used were Leptons: in this form, either a mutually-orbiting pair of one Tau and one anti Muon, or, alternatively, of an anti Tau with a Muon.

These two joint particles were effectively mirror images of one another, and their magnetic moments cancelled each other out via their existence as a randomly-moving population of equal numbers of each kind.

So, these two were normally also undetectable, but only as long as they maintained their random, and hence cancelling, movements.

But, in addition to this commonest case, there were other situations, in which that existence would be radically transformed.

The presence of an alien Charged Particle, within such a Substrate, caused these magnetons (as they came to be called) to gather around the charged particle in magnetic-moment-aligned, concentric shells - thus producing an associated Field.

While, when something like a permanent magnet was present, the magnetons formed aligned chains - continuing the pole given by aligned atoms within the magnet, as lines-of-force outside of it, and carrying on around to return to the magnet's opposite pole.

What had been eminently neutral, overall, as a population of randomly-moving-entities, became Fields when statically-aligned via their magnetic moments to other affecting entities.

Now, what this theorist intends to attempt, is address all these new researches in an "Explanatory Way" - that is using the properties of what are involved to give causal reasons for why things happen in the way that they do.

Such an approach is very different from the usually applied approach for three different reasons.

First, it will not assume the Principle of Plurality, which, though it admits of a multiplicity of affecting factors, in any natural investigated situation, always only targets a single factor at a time, and achieves this by greatly tailoring the investigated context, to make the targeted factor dominant, and then assuming that what is then extractable by this method is exactly the same as that factor when occurring naturally, without any of that revealing tailoring. That is, most certainly, not true: for the extracted factor is always definitely changed by its context. It will be different in different contexts.

Second, it will not be assumed that the natural context can be achieved by merely adding together all the separately extracted factors achieved when applying different farming for each and every one.

Third, the purely quantitative relations achieved by the above means will NOT be considered as Causing Laws, but only as mere descriptions of what occurs in the farmed, arranged-for context. Causes are qualitative, and require the revelation of all the mutually-affecting properties involved.

Solvay Conference 1927

Now, up until the victory of the Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Theory in 1927, physicists always followed the quantitative formulation of relations between the variables involved, with an attempt to explain WHY things behaved as they did, and did so in terms of the various substances involved and their properties.

The initially acquired formal description was always completed by the explanation of the causes involved. Indeed, this final stage was regarded as the most important one, for it alone could be extrapolated as a contributed cause from there to new areas involving common substances and conditions.

Mere quantitative forms are indeed Universal - cropping up all over the place, but they DO NOT infer identical causes!

"Scientific Understanding" resides only in this last and crucial stage in investigating Reality.

It is there, and there alone, that the Objective Content - that revealable part or aspect of the Truth actually resides.

The Majorana fermion at end of superconducting wire

An Explanation?

Now, perhaps we have enough to attempt to explain the discoveries at Princeton - concerning the emergent Majorana particles.

Clearly the presence of a usually undetectable, yet ever-present Universal Substrate - composed entirely of different Majorana particles, which can behave very differently depending upon circumstances, the odd arrangements set up for the Princeton investigation, must be guaranteed to deliver remarkable outcomes.

For, what are regularly proving to be "outside-the-box" situations abound here, namely:-

1. Extremely Low Temperature Physics
2. Superconductivity
3. Extremely meagre traces of substances

And all these occurring in an ever-present, multi-particle and multi-mode Substrate, that is totally undetectable by the usual means. Clearly, in such circumstances, unusual situations will not only arise, but produce individual and detectable phenomena, normally swamped (and hence missed) in more abundant conditions!

The problem will boil down to just how the Substrate Units will interact with these unusual conditions, AND affect those conditions.

After all, this involves a single strand of Iron atoms (with its magnetic potentials), closely involved, both with the complex Substrate and the unusual superconductivity of the lead too.

It seems to me that the two kinds of Magneton particles (both of which are Majoranas), are certain to react to the Iron atom strand, by aligning their magnetic moments with those of the Iron atoms - and particularly at the ends of the strand!

For that is what is assumed to happen with Lines-of-Force around permanent magnets.

Clearly, in this set-up, the presence of the superconducting Lead upon which this occurs, must play a role.

Thoughts on Substrate Magnetons & The Necessary Revolution in Physics I

Ferrofluid on Magnet

The original particles devised (by this theorist) to "effectively begin" to deliver a totally undetectable Universal Substrate - the so-called neutritrons, though they were successful in several very important ways, they did not deliver either Electrical or Magnetic Fields in response to the presence there of charged particles or permanent magnets.

The nature of the neutritrons - as mutually-orbiting-pairs, each one consisting of both a negatively-charged electron, and a positively-charged positron, seemed to be sound, for they would, indeed, be undetectable, while delivering several necessary properties required by that Substrate.

See The Atom and the Substrate for more on this 'aether' theory

So, three things were clear:

1: New additional particles with a similar mutually-orbiting form - that would enable a similar cancelling of opposing properties, and

2: that these would have to consist of two mirror-image pairs (in equal numbers) and moving with a constant "random motion", so that, overall, they would appear undetectable too, and

3: the two new joint-particles would, separately, also have to be capable of delivering electromagnetic effects if aligned around either charged particles, or involved in delivering magnetic "lines-of-force".

Now, these are, clearly, contradictory features, and initially seemed impossible to simultaneously deliver. Until, that is the mutually-orbiting pairs were considered to be of differently-sized sub-particles, with exactly opposite properties across the two proposed new Substrate units.

The neutritron had been devised via two diametrically opposite sub particles of the same size: so the task seemed-to-be to find other Leptons that would fit the bill. Other, already-known joint-entities, such as a "mock atom", consisting of a Proton and a Muon, indicated what these necessary extra particles might well be possible.

By using oppositely-charged pairs consisting of Muons, Taus and anti-Muons and anti-Taus, the required joint-particles seemed possible.

And, whilever they were in constant random movement, involving equal numbers of each kind, they would be undetectable - overall!

But, their unavoidable magnetic moments (due to the differing sizes of the sub particles involved) would create the necessary electromagnetic effects if they were both immobilised-and-aligned around charged particles, or linked in static aligned chains, by their magnetic moments, in magnetic situations.

Now, all this has been published elsewhere, but such a Universal Substrate - available absolutely everywhere, presents all kinds of possibilities in special situations.

The so-far-assumed situations do seem to cover crucial phenomena in the most commonly occurring situations. But anomalies have been mounting in unusual areas of study - such as very low temperature environments and thin film situations..

Indeed, the 2016 Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded for work successfully carried out in precisely these areas, by a trio of British-born scientists (commencing 40 years ago). Also a group at Princeton in the USA have produced "examples" of the fabled Majorana particles where a single "string" of iron atoms are closely associated with a lead substrate in a superconducting state.

Such evidence cries out for an explanation involving an undetectable Universal Substrate - composed, as this theorist's version does, of "Majorana-type" joint-particles, involving both matter and antimatter sub-units.

Physicists at Princeton

But, attempts to address these objectives has been hopelessly stymied by the "formulae-first" approach being employed, along with the Copenhagen standpoint. Crucial explanatory aspects are simply never dealt with.

Frankly - "the tail always wags the dog", so attempts to pull together some sort of explanation are made impossible, for what is needed to attempt to do that, is simply never addressed!

Now, this theorist was, in the past, confronted by the very same problems in addressing the anomalies in the famed Double Slit Experiments, until, that is, he included a Universal undetectable Substrate, that played an enabling role. And, when all the posed-questions of such a Substrate were fully addressed, all of those anomalies were solved, without any recourse whatsoever to the premises of the Copenhagen approach.

But, a great deal of experimental work was available for the many different versions of the Double Slit phenomena, but here, in these investigations, that isn't the case.

The language used in all the accounts I have read is ambiguous - the Princeton example is characteristic. They seem to be seeking Majorana particles at all costs (and with purely pragmatic reasons - associated with Quantum Computers). Accounts switch from talking about electrons of the iron atoms - to locating them in the underlying superconductor.

You can see the problem!

If, as I assume, a Universal Substrate (composed of Majorana particles) is literally everywhere, yet undetectable:-

1: In the surrounding Space

2: In the Superconductor

3: Inside the Iron atoms

Then, as with the changing conditions that have become apparent, in Fields and elsewhere, in such a Substrate, it seems evident that in the very special conditions of the Princeton set-up, all sorts of unique circumstances will be inevitable.

And, this isn't a small matter.

The Crisis in Physics, which precipitated the Formalist Retreat that culminated in the Copenhagen Stance, had been building up for centuries, and meant that physicists were forced to switch their stance, constantly, to enable the addressing of different objectives.

The finally, assumed-to-be, over-riding one was both purely formal representation, along with a long-established, deep-seated and effective Pragmatism - concerning both Prediction and Production as the primary purposes in studying Reality, and its Explanation as, at first secondary, and finally an inconvenient luxury that could be totally dispensed with!

The inevitable anomalies and impasses that naturally arose from the involved contradictory premises, were avoided by dealing only with observed patterns, and depending upon the "assumed Consistency" of Mathematics, in dealing with such things, as the real underlying determinators of all phenomena.

It was of course, not only mistaken, but also entirely an idealist stance.

Now, this whole philosophical problem has been addressed elsewhere, and is available for those who wish a fuller investigation, but clearly it cannot be fully re-addressed here. Suffice it to say that just such a comprehensive investigation has been carried out over many years, and has also recently focussed its attention upon a revolutionary, new approach in the Sciences, and particularly in Physics, with a strictly Materialist - Holist stance, which can finally address the idealist-pragmatist cul de sac that is Copenhagen, and allow a major advance in Explanations of Reality. But, when the attention of literally all physicists is solely focussed upon Forms and Formulae, and their pragmatic use, the important questions are never addressed.

Any break-through will have to be of a similar impact to Darwin's Origin of Species in Biology, but, this time, necessarily involving a major philosophical revolution, and will not be given the credence it requires until it totally buries Copenhagen, once and for all.