Opening remarks.
Order of magnitude calculations will determine if the assumptions of The Dutch Paradigm align with observed realities.
The development of the universe, including the formation of protons and neutrons, is fundamentally deterministic. The Dutch Paradigm suggests that the universe is intentionally designed to be deterministic up to a certain point, enabling conscious observers to understand and apply causality with a purposeful intention. As we progress, these causal relationships may become increasingly complex and potentially less deterministic. It is possible that this complexity allows free will to play an independent role within its physical realm of action.
The long-term effects of these man-made changes on our environment are uncertain.
Defining the mathematical formulas that govern the processes leading to the formation of the dodecahedrons that compose protons and neutrons is a challenging yet achievable task. Currently, these formulas are not available. We will delve deeper into this topic in next volumes of The Dutch Paradigm series. Our ultimate conclusion will be that dodecahedrons emerge from a process of chaos and reorganization, resulting in higher levels of order.
The following text highlights observations and calculations based on the assumption of deterministic-driven events.
The fundamental event clock for observing causalities is the Planck time. Photons and neutrinos are released in the physical universe, exhibiting electromagnetic manifestations at gamma frequency.
Through observations over extremely short distances, we witness phenomena that do not align with classic expectations based on observing and interpreting events in the macroscopic world. A subatomic entity cannot lose all of its electrical free energy; there will always be a limited amount of electrical energy left without compensation, which is recognized by conventional science as the particle-wave duality. There is a time limit known as the Planck time and dynamic phenomena that follow laws that are relatively difficult to comprehend compared to perceived ‘macrocosmic reality.’
Entities travel at incredibly high speeds through the universe. Electromagnetic processes are active in a limited and specific area around each entity. These manifestations are connected to the entity and have certain effects within the surrounding space. An entity does not have a physical extension but becomes observable through its manifestations. When entities approach each other and enter each other’s sphere of influence, processes of repulsion, attraction, harmonization, and similar interactions become apparent.
One can observe processes that aim to restore symmetry in the manifestations of the naked entity, as well as processes that result from interfering in electromagnetic manifestations of each other. With these processes, entities make themselves observable within more complex constructs, leading to macrocosmic effects that allow us to describe these effects in the laws of nature. When electrons merge into protons, we see that an electric phenomenon, ‘charge,’ shows its character as a side effect of the asymmetry of its electrical manifestations in the construct electron. The same applies to the residual effect known as gravity, the attractive force between entities exhibiting ‘mass’ behavior. As human beings, we indirectly observe these entities’ existence and structures.
We observe the world around us through the interference of photons in the retina of our eyes. These photons have frequencies within the visible light spectrum. Originally, these photons emerged at the beginning of the universe with gamma frequencies, but they have since reduced in frequency due to interactions with other entities, in isolation, and constructs of entities. One could consider photons as messengers between different spatial constructs that we can observe. Separated from the observer by space yet interconnected by these photonic messengers, they are entangled. These messengers can reveal details of small spatial constructs and also show large constellations of stars and planets.
1. Gamma-rays
The electromagnetic spectrum indicates frequencies and applications.
Wikipedia:
The energy per photon is in electronvolts. That energy is proportional to the frequency. At a frequency of 2,4 * 10²ᴼ Hz, this is 1 MeV. Gamma-ray is all electromagnetic ray as from approximately 0,2 MeV (at lower frequencies we have the category of Röntgen Rays). Gamma-ray triggered by radioactive decay is under 10 MeV, but in astronomy higher levels of energy are observed.
In linear media, any wave pattern is described as the independent propagation of sinusoidal components. The wavelength λ of a sinusoidal waveform traveling at constant speed v is given by
Where v is called the phase speed (magnitude of the phase velocity) of the wave and f is the wave’s frequency. In a dispersive medium, the phase speed itself depends upon the frequency of the wave, making the relationship between wavelength and frequency nonlinear.
In the case of electromagnetic radiation—such as light—in free space, the phase speed is the speed of light, about 3×108 m/s.
2. IMPACT OF FREE ENERGY
The energy in an electromagnetic manifestation of the entities photon and neutrino comprises:
- Free electric energy
- Potential energy in the frequent sinusoidal compensation system
The first fraction, the free electric energy, is the amount of energy released in the 2nd period of the Big Bang. It is uncompensated by the magnetic compensation.
The second fraction is in a system where energy is frequently converted from electric to magnetic compensation. That is the sinusoidal conversion with the magnetic compensation of the electric energy in the backlog. This concept is similar to the idea in regular science of constant annihilation, where antimatter is compared to matter. It is comparable to what regular science indicates as the constant annihilation, the antimatter versus matter idea. The energy in the sinusoidal system changes with frequency. Frequency reduction in a construct will cause the transfer of free electric energy to free magnetic energy, hence the monopolar gravitational attraction. The free magnetic energy component in a construct reflects the history of interferences that had an impact on the free electric energy.
At the beginning of this free electric energy, there was neither a wave nor a frequency. Once released, the entity is unable to compensate for this quant of free electric energy. From then on, this energy is linked to that entity as free uncompensated energy. The sinusoidal retarded annihilation process begins at the start of the third period. This process reflects the original virtual causality, in which the energy that could impact the entity was in perfect balance, being only potential energy.
We can identify this faction in the electric component of the system as free energy.
That is reflected in the relation
where:
- c= 299792458 m/s is the speed of light in a vacuum
- h= 62606896(33)×10−34 J·s = 4.13566733(10)×10−15 eV·s is Planck ‘s constant.
Planck’s constant is also relevant for the TPlanck, some 10⁻⁴⁴ sec in SI terms.
Whenever the free energy of an object interacts with other objects, it affects the combined magnetic compensation and, in the case of a structure, also its speed relative to the speed of light. In some situations, this process is irreversible or nearly irreversible when the structure is extremely stable.
3. PROTON/NEUTRON
We can now question what frequencies are relevant for the gamma photons and neutrinos that are part of electrons and protons. We know reasonably well the dimensions of a proton or neutron and, thereby, the dimensions of a single dodecahedron.
The size of a neutron is well established as relative to a proton and stated in radii that is available from http://www.slac.stanford.edu/econf/C110613/slides/215–slides.pdf
The radius of a neutron is 0.895 fm. This defines the wavelength of a gamma photon on a plane of the dodecahedron through the twin dodecahedron structure.
One femtometer is equal to 10ˉ¹⁵ meter. The estimated size of the twin dodecahedron structure is 2* 0,895=1,79 fm. The length of the standing wave of the gluon is equal to the perimeter of the face of the dodecahedron and is, therefore, approximately 2 fm. The gluon as a constituent of the electron on a face, will continue at the speed of light while circling the face of the dodecahedron as part of the original electron.
The frequency related to this wavelength is f=v/λ or f=3*10⁸/2*10ˉ¹⁵= 1,5*10²³ Hz.
The ‘mass’ of a neutron is 939,565378MeV/c², so free energy up to 939,6 MeV is converted in additional monopolar magnetic compensation, the gravitational attraction.
The free energy still available for further encounters is following out of the equation
E=hf being E=4,135.10⁻¹⁵.1,5.10²³=6,20.10⁸ eV=620 MeV related to the constituents of 24 gamma photons and 23 neutrinos.
So, the reduction in free energy per single entity of 47 is 939,6/48= 19,6 MeV. That translates into an estimate for the original starting frequency as per period 3.
This starting frequency will be approximately proportional higher with a factor of (620+ 19,6)/620= 1,03.
That makes a start frequency of 1,54.10²³ Hz.
4. NEUTRINO
The neutrino is assumed to have ‘mass’, though very small:
Wikipedia :
The Standard Model of particle physics assumed that neutrinos are massless. However the experimentally established phenomenon of neutrino oscillation, which mixes neutrino flavour states with neutrino mass states (analogously to CKM mixing), requires neutrinos to have nonzero masses. Massive neutrinos were originally conceived by Bruno Pontecorvo in the 1950s. Enhancing the basic framework to accommodate their mass is straightforward by adding a right–handed Lagrangian. This can be done in two ways. If, like other fundamental Standard Model particles, mass is generated by the Dirac mechanism, then the framework would require a SU(2) singlet. This particle would have no other Standard Model interactions (apart from the Yukawa interactions with the neutral component of the Higgs doublet), so is called a sterile neutrino. Or, mass can be generated by the Majorana mechanism, which would require the neutrino and antineutrino to be the same particle.
The strongest upper limit on the masses of neutrinos comes from cosmology: the Big Bang model predicts that there is a fixed ratio between the number of neutrinos and the number of photons in the cosmic microwave background. If the total energy of all three types of neutrinos exceeded an average of 50 eV per neutrino, there would be so much mass in the universe that it would collapse. This limit can be circumvented by assuming that the neutrino is unstable; however, there are limits within the Standard Model that make this difficult. A much more stringent constraint comes from a careful analysis of cosmological data, such as the cosmic microwave background radiation, galaxy surveys, and the Lyman–alpha forest. These indicate that the summed masses of the three neutrino varieties must be less than 0.3 eV.
In 1998, research results at the Super–Kamiokande neutrino detector determined that neutrinos can oscillate from one flavor to another, which requires that they must have a nonzero mass. While this shows that neutrinos have mass, the absolute neutrino mass scale is still not known. This is because neutrino oscillations are sensitive only to the difference in the squares of the masses. The best estimate of the difference in the squares of the masses of mass eigenstates 1 and 2 was published by KamLAND in 2005: Δm221 = 0.000079 eV2. In 2006, the Minos experiment measured oscillations from an intense muon neutrino beam, determining the difference in the squares of the masses between neutrino mass eigenstates 2 and 3. The initial results indicate |Δm2 32| = 0.0027 eV2, consistent with previous results from SuperKamiokande. Since|Δm2 32| is the difference between two squared masses, at least one of them has to have a value which is at least the square root of this value. Thus, there exists at least one neutrino mass eigenstate with a mass of at least 0.04 eV.
In 2009 lensing data of a galaxy cluster were analyzed to predict a neutrino mass of about 1.5 eV. All neutrino masses are then nearly equal, with neutrino oscillations of order meV. They lie below the
Mainz-Troitsk upper bound of 2.2 eV for the electron antineutrino. The latter will be tested in 2015 in the KATRIN experiment, that searches for a mass between 0.2 eV and 2 eV.
A number of efforts are underway to directly determine the absolute neutrino mass scale in laboratory experiments. The methods applied involve nuclear beta decay
On 31 May 2010, OPERA researchers observed the first tau neutrino candidate event in a muon neutrino beam, the first time a transformation in neutrinos had been observed, giving evidence that they have mass.
In July 2010 the 3-D MegaZ DR7 galaxy survey reported that they had measured a limit of the combined mass of the three neutrino varieties to be less than 0.28 eV. A tighter upper bound yet for this sum of masses, 0.23 eV, was reported in March 2013 by the Planck collaboration.
If the neutrino is a Majorana particle, the mass can be calculated by finding the half–life of neutrinoless double–beta decay of certain nuclei. The lowest upper limit, on the Majorana mass of the neutrino, has been set by EXO–200 140–380 meV
A photon has free energy, E, that is proportional to its frequency, f, by
h=4.135 667 516 * 10ˉ¹⁵ eVs
It is likely that a neutrino has a similar amount of free energy. However, this free energy has only limited possibilities to interact with other entities with electromagnetic manifestations.
There is no clear understanding of why a neutrino has some mass. Reports indicate a neutrino has a mass equivalent with E values between 0,04 eV to 2,5 eV.
Note: It is remarkable that this reduction in frequency is comparable to the frequencies of visible light. Visible light has an energy content of 1,68 eV – 3,26 eV and this ΔE for neutrinos ranges from 0,04 – 2,5 eV.
That means the electron and the proton oscillate at frequencies within the visible light range.
5. ELECTRON
The ‘invariant mass’ of an electron is 0,510998928 MeV/c². The related energy content of this invariant mass is 0,510998928 MeV. That is, the free energy equivalent is transferred to mass while reducing the frequencies of the free electric manifestations and the electromagnetic system of the two entities that merged into the electron.
The assumption involves an equal transfer of energy by both constituents, with the difference in frequency still present for the gamma photon and the gamma neutrino.
For each of the two constituents, a portion of 0,5*0,510998928 MeV transfers into an active free monopolar magnetic compensation, with a reduction in speed relative to the speed of light.
If we compare this with the reduction of the free energy of electrons as bound in the dodecahedron, then we see 19,6 MeV compared with 0,255 MeV. That implies a frequency reduction factor for each constituent of an electron relative to the starting conditions of (620+0,255)/620= 1,0004.
If we assume that the highest frequency observed for gamma rays is valid for the initial frequency, then this forming of an electron has induced a reduction of the frequency of the gamma photon and neutrino. This reduction is to approximately 1,533.10²³ Hz. That reduction is rather limited compared to the start frequency of 1,54.10²³, all in metrics of the SI system.
There is no clear understanding of the size or spatial representation of the electron.
The difference between the amalgamation of the constituents in a naked electron, compared with the electron in a naked neutron, is in the order of magnitude of 939/(47*0,5)=40 in extended spatial representation. Without jumping to conclusions, it is noticeable that there are no major discrepancies in the order of magnitudes relative to the accepted values of the properties of these constructs.
6. DODECAHEDRON
The formation of the dodecahedron is a significant development in the events of emerging structures after the Big Bang. Some observations prompt specific questions that require answers.
- What triggers the absence of Coulomb’s repelling forces of the electric charges of the electrons in the dodecahedron?
Vectors on opposite faces point in opposite directions, highlighting the directional sensitivity of electrical phenomena. As previously discussed, the electro has the gamma photon rotating offset around the center of the neutrino. Consequently, when the opposing electrons are aligned, they can attract one another. In this area of alignment, two electrons can attract, similar to a behavior known as Cooper pairing.
The properties of electric free energy and the force exerted by asymmetrical electrical manifestations show notable similarities.
- Compensation of the ½ spin manifestations
When two neutrinos spiral in opposite directions, they effectively cancel each other’s ½ spin behavior. This cancellation would lead to the annihilation of an electron-positron pair; however, this does not occur due to the inherent distance between the opposite faces within a dodecahedron.
- Free magnetic manifestation is monopolar
The free magnetic manifestations do not cancel each other out when on opposite. This is because the free magnetic manifestation has a monopolar character. The base of its origin is the monopolar magnetic manifestation of the neutrino of the electron on each face. Therefore, the neutrino is essential in each construct to provide the monopolar magnetic manifestation to build up what is known as the gravitational force.