Y-Bias and Angularity:©
The Dynamics of Self-Organizing Criticality
From the Zero Point to Infinity
David G. Yurth
Donald Ayres, A.E.
August 2005
Third [Tertiary] Scale
This is the scale at which differentiated time-domain and spin-polarized charge ensemble pairs interact to create the first fully integrated components of the physical universe. The CDF Collaboration at FermiLabs refers to these primary components as Sub-Quarks of two specific varieties. This is the scale at which the attractive effects exerted by spinors are first observable as magnetic field effects which demonstrate polarity [[i]]. The headline reads, FERMILAB MEDIA ADVISORY 2/7/96, CDF Results Raise Questions on Quark Structure. An article scheduled to appear in the February 9 issue of Science describes results contained in a paper submitted to Physical Review Letters by the 450-member Collider Detector collaboration at Fermilab. The CDF paper reports results that appear to be at odds with predictions based on the current theory of the fundamental structure of matter. The paper, submitted January 21, 1996, reports the collaboration’s measurement of the probability that the fundamental constituents of matter [e.g., Quarks and Anti-quarks] will be deflected, or will “scatter,” when very high energy Protons collide with anti-Protons, according to CDF spokesmen William Carithers and Giorgio Bellettini.
Dynamics:
The nature of the Sub-Quark [and other lesser-known and perhaps more esoteric sub-atomic units such as Neutrinos] has proven to be somewhat troublesome to scientific purists.[[ii]] The Sub-Quark demonstrates a most peculiar behavior, both physically and mathematically. As each Sub-Quark matches the spin and polarity of its partner [in the same way that defines the attributes of the interactions between Positron-Electron pairs], it demonstrates a distinct phased pulsing behavior, a ‘quantum frequency’ if you will, which shows up on a photographic emulsion plate as a series of dashes separated by discrete spaces. As the film plates developed at FermiLabs show, the first track of a Sub-Quark separated from its paired partner looked like this: ______ ______ _____ ______.
Figure 4
[[iii]]
When pressed to explain this phenomenon, the CDF team at first suggested a variety of possible alternatives: Perhaps the particle was so much smaller than the grain density of the photographic film emulsion that it could not be consistently displayed. This was considered a distinct possibility until the uniformity/regularity of the pulsating oscillation was established. Perhaps it was so much smaller than the quarter-wave frequency used by the scanning Electron microscope to capture the image that its image was incorrectly displayed. Perhaps there was something about the way the Sub-Quark was spinning, or was polarized at the time of impact, that distorted its magnetic field or unaccountably refracted the EM wave functions used to capture the image of its passage across the screen.
After years of work and the introduction of significant refinements to the image capturing process, the report published by the CDF Collaboration convincingly demonstrates that the attributes demonstrated by the dash-space-dash-space signature of the Sub-Quark are the result of a fascinating set of attributes which appear to be unique to Sub-Quarks. This behavior has only been observed in the hard-vacuum environment of a high-speed linear particle accelerator, under carefully controlled conditions, with one notable exception.[[iv]]
In the context of Y-Bias/Angularity theory, the set of attributes which operate at the tertiary scale to create Sub-Quarks is the product of four sets of interactions:
* Y-Bias angle of intersection of the secondary scale charge ensembles, * Weighted waveform vector velocities of the secondary scale charge ensembles, * Angular momentum of the secondary scale charge ensembles, and * Chiral Helicity [angular momentum defined as quantum spin direction] of the intersecting charge ensembles.
In recent iterations of M Theory, the QED/SED hypotheses, and in accordance with Bell’s Theorem and Whittaker’s proofs, the quantum frequency and energy states of Sub-Quarks must by definition represent the cumulative aggregate effect of all these interacting time-domain polarization, spin polarity, Y-Bias angularity and EM polarity vectors. In Y-Bias/Angularity terms, the SOC behaviors and attributes demonstrated by these essential building blocks constitute the set of derivative effects exerted by the exercise of SOC dynamical rules.
Further, and perhaps more importantly, when taken as an aggregate expression of SOC organizational dynamics, Sub-Quarks become the first paired combinations of spin-polarized actual charge ensembles to demonstrate quantum waveform coherence, at a wide variety of frequencies, each of which appears to be consistent with the quantum frequency demonstrated by correlated sixth order [fully formed atoms] aggregations comprising the elements of the Periodic Table and their isotopes. The telling indicator which leads to this conclusion is that upon close examination of the CDF’s experimentally and rigorously reported results, Sub-Quarks appear to manifest elemental quantum signatures in ranges which are harmonic with respect to certain frequencies [e.g., the elements of the periodic table and their isotopes] but which are dissonant with respect to no others.
This result is consistent with the results rigorously observed and experimentally verified by J. Hait and his research team at the University of California at San Diego, in which the amplifying and canceling patterns produced by the overlapping of the interference fringes surrounding two identically propagated beams of laser light demonstrate the dynamics of resonant and dissonant harmonics operating at the tertiary scale. This phenomenon operates in the context of a holographic image to perform all seven of the Boolean logic functions intrinsic to digital data processing [[v]]. This discovery now provides the basis for the evolution of a truly photonic computational architecture which can operate without the interposition of opto-electric crystals.
The Importance of the Sub-Quark
First, the reported experimental results suggest that the dash-space-dash-space quantum frequency signature demonstrated by Sub-Quarks may be unique to each elemental material rather than a Sub-Quark attribute in general. Researchers are still investigating whether this constitutes a kind of Sub-Quarkian fingerprint by which elemental materials could be conclusively identified as they form. If it can be verified, this would provide a result with implications reaching far beyond the domain of the current state-of-the-art of particle physics.
Second, and perhaps equally intriguing, is the realization that the Sub-Quark film track almost certainly demonstrates the time-domain polarization attributes of this sub-atomic unit, as predicted by Y-Bias/Angularity theory and as described by Bearden et al. The Sub-Quark’s track looks the way it does because the particle exists and then does not exist, exists and then does not exist, in L4, as a function of its energy pumping and self-organizing, self-sustaining nature. With the discovery of the Sub-Quark, we observe for the very first time a scientifically verified instance of self-organizing criticality and dissipative structural behaviors in a single measurable physical component.[[vi]]
Experimental/ Observations:
In 1996, Anastasovski experimentally verified that under certain carefully controlled conditions, photons of real light can be shown conclusively to demonstrate properties of measurable mass. This heretical idea is explained in Anastasovski’s extraordinary book, Quantum Mass Theory Compatible With Quantum Field Theory.[[vii]]
These two rigorously verified experimental protocols, coupled with the leading edge work of Humphrey Maris, lead us to conclude that the nature of Sub-Quarks, Quarks, Leptons/ Fermions and light itself is not adequately described by the Standard Model. Indeed, in the context of Y-Bias/Angularity and SOC theory, Sub-Quarks are an inevitable and indispensable component in the evolutional process by which matter, energy, time, all field effects and light itself are brought into being. Armed with this fundamentally new way of ‘seeing’ how nature works at finer scales, we can both accommodate phenomena which have heretofore remained unexplainable and predict the discovery of other phenomena which have not yet been observed [or at least admitted] by mainstream science.
Fourth [Quaternary] Scale
This is the scale at which organized charge ensembles first demonstrate entropy, weighted waveform vector velocities, chiral helicities and other complementary attributes, which combine to create six known varieties of Quarks and their Anti-quark complementary opposites. This category of sub-atomic ensembles does not include the Leptoquark [believed to be a constituent of electrons, neutrinos, etc.] or the Pentaquark [a theoretically supportable quark structure only recently experimentally observed]. At this scale, the standard model imposes what has come to be known as the Pauli Exclusion Principle, to explain why some sub-atomic particles are prohibited from occupying the same space and/or energetic state while others are not. In the strictest sense, Quarks specifically violate the Pauli Exclusion Principle because, by definition, they are presumed to never operate or exist as singularities, and occupy precisely the same space as the Hadrons and Baryons which are supposed to be subject to the same exclusionary rules.
Penta-Quarks – Unexplained Anomalies
Physicists recently verified the existence of a class of subatomic particle that provides unexpected insights into the fundamental building blocks of matter. The discovery involves Quarks – particles that make up the Protons and Neutrons usually found in the nuclei of atoms. The new particle is the so-called Pentaquark – five Quarks in formation [[viii]]. Until now, physicists had only seen Quarks packed into two- or three-Quark combinations. The discovery of this new particle should have far-reaching consequences for our understanding of how the universe is put together.
Until recently, no firm evidence of Pentaquarks existed, even though physicists have searched for these objects for over 30 years. In 2002, the first tentative evidence of the Pentaquark was put forward at an international scientific conference in Japan. In July 2003, a report of this work was submitted for publication to the journal Physical Review Letters. According to Dr. David Whitehouse, Science Editor for BBC News Online, the report says that Pentaquarks were created by blasting carbon atoms with highly energized X-rays. The work was performed by a Japanese team, led by Takashi Nakano of Osaka University. Other evidence for the Pentaquark has recently been reported by other experimenters, with perhaps the strongest evidence coming from the Jefferson Lab in Virginia, USA.
Figure 5
Digital image of Carbon atoms
being bombarded by X-rays.
Physicist Ken Hicks of Ohio University, who took part in both the experiment and the confirmatory work at the Jefferson Lab, says it took him two months to convince himself that the Pentaquark was real. For a long time, scientists have been puzzled as to why only the Quark combinations formulated by Gell-Mann etal existed. Some predicted other combinations such as the Pentaquark, which consists of five Quarks, including an anti-Quark.
Figure 6
Diagram of X-ray interactions with Carbon
atoms to produce Pentaquark components.
This diagram of the particle interactions which produced the results contained in the report validates an important thesis of the Y-Bias/Angularity Theory. It demonstrates, for example, that the Y-Bias angle of intersection between the interactive components is consistent throughout the structure and operates at the 540 – 560 optimal angle predicted by Y-Bias author D. Ayers. This angle, which is intrinsic to the semantic structure of the Fibonacci Series, is reflected in the structure of matter and field interactions at all scales. The discovery of the Pentaquark, also known as a new exotic Baryon state, should have far-reaching consequences for our theory of particle interactions, which attempts to explain the structure of matter in terms of its Y-Bias and Angularity attributes.
Archetypal Forms
At the Quaternary scale and beyond, we observe the operation of archetypal forms everywhere in the cosmos. Why this is so and what it means about the way Nature works has never been adequately addressed by mainstream science. The authors posit that this phenomenon occurs because the cosmos operates according to a set of simple, elegant organizing principles which can be expected to find expression at every scale. For example, Y-Bias and Angularity Theory holds that topological variations of the Torus, seen as a Soliton in photonics and a Vortex in electromagnetism, should be found at every scale of systemic evolution throughout L4. Beginning with the Quark, the presence of such forms is rigorously reported in the literature of numerous scientific disciplines.
Bose Einstein Condensate
The Y-Bias and Angularity vectors which operate to create a torus are known, particularly in a highly negatively charged locale [[ix]]. At the Fourth Scale, we see them in standing waves [Solitons], as found in the Bose-Einstein Condensate [D. Jin, JILA/BEC].
Figure 7
Emergence of vortex structure in a
rotating Bose-Einstein Condensate [[x]]
As this image amply illustrates, the coherent organization of disordered virtual energy ensembles which organize themselves to form the observable structures found in L4 is a process which operates consonant with 1/ƒ quantized SOC interactions. The Y-Bias angle of interaction between the disordered virtual photons arising from the Physical Vacuum is a fundamental determiner of the extent to which virtual photons and energy quanta couple to create matter, energy and/or field effects. The resultant product of this primary interaction is referred to here as the ‘Bose Einstein Condensate.’ In this illustration of Fourth Scale SOC behavior, the Y-Bias orientation of the charge ensembles with respect to each other are clearly consistent and uniform. The angle of incidence of the respective intersections is measured at 22.50 and 54.750 respectively, which is consistent with the optimal angle of incidence found in variations of the Fibonacci Series and the Cherenkov Angle at various scales.
Quarks and Gravitational Force
In addition, it has been rigorously reported and experimentally verified that Quarks are not subject to gravitational field effects. It was for this reason that Santilli and others strenuously objected to the postulation of Quarks provided by Gell-Mann and his collaborators at MIT. What this suggests about the structure of the cosmos and the true nature of mass as described by the Standard Model is profound. If gravitational field effects are primary, mutually exclusive and intrinsic to the fabric of the cosmos at all scales, nothing in the evolutional structure of L4 should be exempt from its effects. The verification that Quarks are not subject to gravitational field effects suggests that such forces are derivative of evolutional interactions rather than primary and mutually exclusive. In fact, this is precisely what Y-Bias/Angularity theory predicts.
Dynamics:
Quarks are described by the Standard Model as a type of sub-atomic particle found inside Protons or Neutrons. The model holds that Hadrons and Baryons, the building blocks of nuclear architectures, are each comprised of three Quarks. Six kinds of Quarks are described by Gell-Mann. They are variously described as up, down, strange, charm, bottom and top. The bottom and top Quarks are sometimes called ‘beauty’ and ‘truth’ Quarks. Protons are shown to be made up of two ‘ups’ and one ‘down’ Quark. Neutrons are believed to be comprised of one ‘up’ and two ‘down’ Quarks, although one branch of astrophysics insists that Neutrons are the product of the combining of one Proton with a single Electron. Further, the standard model holds, despite the experimental results published by the CDF, that single Quarks have never been detected. They are believed to be always combined with other Quarks. By this reasoning, mainstream science has concluded that Quarks are the primary, indivisible building blocks of L4. Presumably, that is why Gell-Mann was awarded the Nobel Prize for the physical verification of two types of Quarks.
Figure 8
[[xi]]
Nevertheless, rigorous experimental evidence conclusively demonstrates that current descriptions of the nature, dynamics, attributes and behaviors of Quarks, as found in the Standard Model, are both insufficient and incorrect. What is not explained by Gell-Mann and the Standard Model is perhaps more important than simply knowing that Quarks exist. Why, for example, is more than 99.9% of all the known matter in L4 comprised of only two of the six Quarks postulated by Gell-Mann? What is it about the nature and interaction of Quarks that causes them to behave as they do? What about the other four kinds of Quarks? If they are known to exist, and demonstrate the attributes ascribed to them, why don’t they interact in ways which are consistent with the dictates of the GTR, EPR and the Standard Model? Why do the rules which apply to all other forms of matter require special conditions and exemptions in order for the Quark construct to be accommodated? And what about the Leptoquark and the Pentaquark? While their existence has been postulated, and Maris’ work calls for them, nothing in the Standard Model or Gell-Mann’s formulations accommodate or predict them.
In terms of Y-Bias, Angularity and Self-Organizing Criticality Theory, the family of Quarks possesses characteristics which are derivatives of interactions which have occurred at finer scales, which, when taken together, comport with the underlying set of rules which operate uniformly and consistently throughout L4, at all scales, without exceptions or special conditions. The underlying interactions which combine to create Quarks demonstrate harmonic resonance, even at the finest granularity of structure, as predicted by Plotnikov and Anastasovski. The angularity of the internal Y-Bias interactions of the Sub-Quarks, combined with all four of the SOC rules we have identified, cause the Quarks to manifest the spin-polarity, color, electrical charge and other characteristics which define their natures.
In Y-Bias/Angularity theory, two Quarks make up 99.9% of the matter found in L4 because these two Quarks combine at Y-Bias angles which optimally match spin, polarity, and electrical charge attributes in a way which satisfies the rules of SOC dynamics. Y-Bias/Angularity Theory predicts, in addition, that all six Quarks demonstrate a quantum oscillation frequency signature which is element and isotope specific. Quarks are not just generic aggregations of a general set of quantum-defined characteristics. Rather, Quarks of matching quantum signatures combine naturally to comprise Hadrons and Baryons which already carry some of the constituent-identifying characteristics, which eventually evolve to comprise the natural elements and their isotopes.
When viewed from this perspective, isotopes represent the less-than-optimal results of Y-Bias/Angularity interactions between Hadrons, Baryons and Leptons which are less stable, less balanced and less ‘harmonically balanced’ than their elemental sources. As a matter of practical consideration, this interpretation of the structure of matter and the field effects, energetic properties and interactions which manifest the behaviors of the materials identified in the periodic table of elements and isotopes, makes it possible to explain why the application of integrated waveform and frequency signatures can be combined to mitigate or amplify all the basic properties manifest by matter in L4.
Experimental/ Observations:
The Standard Model asserts that Quarks possess what is known as “Quark color charge.” This property is named after primary colors but is ascribed to the Quarks by analogy. The Standard Model does not provide a means for describing this set of properties in a way that can be directly attributed to the intrinsic nature of Quarks. Rather, the concept of ‘color charge’ is a mathematical convenience which is intended to explain the nature of Quarks by naming their attributes rather than describing how and why these attributes arise and operate as they do.
According to this model, there are three such charges. Taken together, as a matter of mathematical convenience, these ‘color charges’ are held to be the causative attributes by which Quarks stick together to make larger particles, and which cause Protons and Neutrons to stick together despite the electrical repulsion between Protons. The ‘charge colors’ are called blue, green, red and anti-blue, anti-green and anti-red.
Work recently performed at the Stanford Linear Accelerator suggests that while there may be six varieties of Quarks, as Gell-Mann suggests, little has been done to reconcile the inexplicable conflicts between predictions made by the Standard Model and rigorously observed phenomena produced in their own facility, at FermiLabs and Brookhaven National Laboratories. The primary example of the extent to which the Standard Model is crippled is found in the failure of any laboratory to validate the Standard Model’s predictions regarding the attributes and behaviors of a fundamental type of sub-atomic particle named the Muon.[[xii]]
As Santilli rightly suggests, and as experimental evidence amply demonstrates, quantum mechanics becomes increasingly approximate as a means of describing interactive behaviors at increasingly finer scales. This is true because quantum mechanics is, itself, the product of a combination of flawed mathematical assumptions. Perhaps no one is better qualified nor more widely recognized as an authority on this subject than Rugerro Santilli. His reformulation of hadronic mechanics supplies the missing links which ameliorate the predictive errors intrinsic to the mainstream quantum mechanical approach. According to Santilli’s model, when observable phenomena are rigorously reported so that all experimentally obtained data is included in an experimental analysis, Y-Bias/Angularity Theory can be applied to describe anomalous findings in terms of the extent to which they represent a range of Y-Bias interactions across the scale.
_____
[i] “Inclusive Jet Cross Section in pbar p Collisions at sqrt s = 1.8TeV,” F. Abe et al., The CDF Collaboration, FERMILAB-PUB-96/020-E. Submitted to Phys. Rev. Lett. January 24, 1996 — Abstract, Paper
[ii] FERMILAB MEDIA ADVISORY 2/7/96, CDF Results Raise Questions on Quark Structure. An article to appear in the February 9 issue of Science describes results contained in a paper submitted to Physical Review Letters by the 450-member Collider Detector collaboration at Fermilab. The CDF paper reports results that appear to be at odds with predictions based on the current theory of the fundamental structure of matter. The paper, submitted January 21, reports the collaboration’s measurement of the probability that the fundamental constituents of matter will be deflected, or will “scatter,” when very high energy Protons collide with antiProtons, according to CDF spokesmen William Carithers and Giorgio Bellettini.
[iii] Particles and their decay patterns, sub-quarks as illustrated by the CDF Collaboration, found at
www-cdf.fnal.gov/events/pic/decay_chart.gif
[iv] Phillips, S., “The Extrasensory Perception of Quarks,” loc. cit.
[v] Hait, J. Information Exchange Attributes of Standing Wave Lasers at the Interference Fringe, ref.
[vi] Wilcock, D., Comment: This brings to mind Dr. Paul LaViolette’s discussions of the Belousov-Zhabotinsky effect – which is a macro-level event of a similar type in his definition. Also the “ball lightning” in Hessdalen, Norway, which I wrote about in Divine Cosmos, blinks “on” and “off” at times but is still detectable in the infrared spectrum when it is “off”, thus suggesting that it is going into another domain whose fingerprints are still visible in infrared.
[vii] Anastasovski, ref:
[viii] news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3034754.stm
[ix] Shoulders, K. Appendix 1 ref.
[x]This visualization of the interior of a rotating Bose-Einstein condensate shows an array of 12 spontaneously appearing vortices. Bright regions correspond to low condensate density, and color denotes the phase of the condensate wave function. Experimental and theoretical developments in Bose-Einstein condensation are discussed in articles by Wolfgang Ketterle (page 30) and by Keith Burnett, Mark Edwards, and Charles Clark (page 37). (Image courtesy of David L. Feder and Peter Ketcham, NIST, Gaithersburg, Maryland.)
[xi] FermiLab CDF Collaboration, “Mass of Quarks” diagram found at www-cdf.fnal.gov/events/pic/6q_mass.gif
[xii] FermiLab/Brookhave Muon results, ref. found at
d0server1.fnal.gov/projects/Muon_Electronics/web_page/Muon_par.pdf
