Particle Motion After Magnetic Pulse

Abstract and Introduction
Previous work has shown 1) object displacement after magnetic pulse injections [1] and 2) loss of motion-related inertia states after cooling to zero Kelvin [2]. These findings demonstrated that the bit function (eqs. 2 and 39 in [3]) in binary mechanics (BM) contains simultaneous position and motion representation. Therefore, the bit function is a major advance beyond the quantum mechanics (QM) wave function. Hence, the Heisenberg uncertainty principle has been demoted from fundamental QM precept to "observer effect". This paper replicates the particle motion study [1] adding separate tracking of energy quanta (1-state bits) in the oppositely-charged proton and electron bit cycles. Magnetic pulse injections displaced quanta regardless of electric charge, further supporting the notion that some or all L bits may represent magnetic monopoles. In sum, with eqs. 5 and 6 in [3], bit function M and L bits each have two types: plus or minus charge and right or left direction respectively.

Fig. 1: Proton Displacement After Magnetic Pulses

Legend: Pulses: L bits (Y^ up or Yv down) injected at Tick 0. In length constant L units,
displacement expressed as Y component minus mean(X,Z) translated to zero at Tick 0.

Methods and Results
The Binary Mechanics Lab Simulator (BMLS v1.8.2, Free download) was used to create two experimental conditions as described previously [1], with the magnetic pulses injected in the Y dimension (Y^ up or Yv down in Figs. 1 and 2) in the Tick 0 initial system state. All energy quanta (1-state bits) in the proton and electron bit cycles [4] were tracked over 43 BMLS Ticks (Figs 1 and 2 respectively) using the {pr1, pr2, pr3} and {er1, er2, er3} position data in the *.csv output files. The "up" and "down" pulse injection data is based on two different randomly seeded initial states. Data collection can be repeated using the magnetic_up.bat and magnetic_dn.bat files in the BMLS download.

Fig. 2: Electron Displacement After Magnetic Pulses

Legend: Pulses: L bits (Y^ up or Yv down) injected at Tick 0. In length constant L units,
displacement expressed as Y component minus mean(X,Z) translated to zero at Tick 0.

For both the proton (Fig. 1) and electron (Fig. 2) data, the injected magnetic pulses produced displacement in the direction of the injected L bits regardless of bit cycle net electric charge sign. Note that "ascending and descending values of spot coordinates...are deemed to be right and left respectively" [3]). Thus, the "Y^ up" magnetic pulses represent left-oriented L bits along the Y axis and the "Yv down" pulses correspond to right-oriented L bits.

In this pilot study, the proton and electron displacements develop over about six Ticks (6 Ticks = 2 x {electron bit cycle duration}) and then appear to plateau as if the magnitude of the magnetic pulses is systematically related to the displacement distance. Considering approximate plateau Ticks 7 to 42, the electron quanta displacements were 47% greater than the proton quanta displacements.

Fig. 3: Proton Cycle Position After Magnetic Pulses


Fig. 3 shows the raw data for quanta in the proton bit cycle after "up" or "down" magnetic pulse injection translated to zero starting position at Tick 0. To quote from the early sound "Laural and Hardy" comedy films, at first glance, Fig. 3 looks like "one fine mess". On the other hand, note that two different randomly-seeded initial states are shown, each having its own future motion coded in its initial state as seen in a previous study [5]. Also, the magnetic pulses injected at Tick 0 along the Y axis may produce some displacement over subsequent Ticks in X and Z axis positions. Nonetheless, in the 7 to 42 Tick "plateau", the Y axis displacements are greater than their corresponding X and Z axis components.

Hence, in each Fig. 1 and 2, two composite variables were created. Each composite variable was Y displacement (up or down) minus the mean of the corresponding X and Z values in Fig. 3.

Discussion
Sports Update: BM team leading QM. The present data shows once again the superiority of the BM bit function over the QM wave function in system state representation. The bit function simultaneously codes position and motion. Specifically, in BMLS Ticks 1 to 6 in Figs. 1 and 2, motion information in the bit function at Tick 0 from the injected magnetic potential pulses may be realized in position change at about Tick 7. A BMLS Tick contains a 4t cycle in which the four time-development bit operations are applied where tick t duration is the fundamental time constant T [6]. This 24t interval (6 x 4t) is some three orders of magnitude shorter than the presently observable time in the attosecond range. The velocity of motion in the position change can be calculated with this duration (24T) and distance travelled: {"plateau" position change} x L where L is the fundamental length constant, approx. 0.67 fm.

Magnetic pulse injections displaced quanta regardless of electric charge, further supporting the notion that some or all L bits may represent magnetic monopoles. In sum, with eqs. 5 and 6 in [3], bit function M and L bits each have two types: plus or minus charge and right or left direction respectively. Recall that the spatial distribution of L bits is the magnetic potential field. If some or all L bits are magnetic monopoles, the north-south features of a magnetic field may reflect the right-left directional attribute of type L bits in the bit function.

This pilot study produced a new BM result on the duration of bit function coded future motion, namely about six BMLS Ticks which equals two round trips in the electron bit cycle. Is this time interval a constant or does it vary as a function of other variables? Is this coded future motion duration based on an applied magnetic potential in the present study the same for applied electric potentials?

Sound Effect Insert.
Sports Broadcaster The BM team is scoring goal after goal while the routed QM team fans chant "quantum, quantum". But the QM-ers are "all show and no go". They have not yet even quantized the basic parameters used in all of their plays on the field.
Sports Commentator Yes, Jim. You certainly would think, this deep into the season, that the QM-ers would have their mass, length and time units quantized. And the QM-er coaching staff may be in trouble as contract renewals for the next season are coming up.

We Blame The World. A slight variation of the Michael Jackson hit song "We are the world" sums up much of physics history for maybe more than half a century in the QM era. The trend has been to proclaim that researcher difficulties in measurement and understanding of certain variables (such as energy, time, position, momentum) is not really a limitation of the researchers, but rather a limitation of the world. Instead of admitting ignorance, researchers have declared in effect, "it is the universe that is ignorant, not us". However, it is not "the world" that is ignorant.

For example, the Heisenberg uncertainty ignorance principle was not merely a handy rule describing observer limitations, but rather has been "sold" as a fundamental principle of quantum physics (Fig. 5 in [2]). In a similar apparently shameful fashion, other purported QM principles or "axioms" are blamed on the universe, not lack of knowledge or technology. Another example has been "quantum indeterminacy of position". But the bit function represents exact position of every quanta. So-called "quantum" effects have been portrayed as "difficult to understand" and "outside everyday experience", etc. But ignorance is in fact a common everyday experience. And QM calculations have been cheered as astounding science victories while any good statistical model, by definition, is supposed to provide accurate "predictions" of results in future samples. The difference between statistical modeling and physics has been largely ignored. Meanwhile, it is strange that the basic parameters in continuous space-time theory -- mass, length and time, upon which QM and Standard Model equations are based, have remained unquantized until...

As far as the author knows, BM has been the only substantive effort to actually quantize the basic parameters used in physics. As a good statistical model, the Dirac equation might provide key insights about physics. Hence, a pair of relativistic Dirac spinor equations of opposite handedness was used to propose a space-time-energy quantization [3].

References
[1] Keene, J. J. "Particle motion representation" J. Bin. Mech. May, 2016.
[2] Keene, J. J. "Zero Kelvin particle states" J. Bin. Mech. May, 2018.
[3] Keene, J. J. "Binary mechanics" J. Bin. Mech. July, 2010.
[4] Keene, J. J. "Proton and electron bit cycles" J. Bin. Mech. April, 2015.
[5] Keene, J. J. "Particles in a box" J. Bin. Mech. January, 2016.
[6] Keene, J. J. "Intrinsic electron spin and fundamental constants" J. Bin. Mech. January, 2015.
© 2018 James J Keene