Abstract and Introduction
The eight elementary particles consist of four matter particles -- electron (e-L) and three R-handed d quarks (dR, red, green, blue), and four antimatter particles -- positron (e+R) and three L-handed d quarks (dL, red, green, blue) [1] [2]. With quantization of space, time and energy in binary mechanics (BM) [1], each of these eight particles is associated with a spatial object called a spot which may contain zero to six 1-state bits of quantized energy [3]. If a simulation randomly seeds these spots with 1-state energy bits, each particle type would represent about one eighth (0.125) of the total energy. This exploratory, descriptive study reports the discovery that application of the four fundamental time-evolution bit operations [4] causes redistribution of energy among the particle types which then exhibit markedly different energy densities. In addition, the distribution of energy among lepton and quark particle types by these time-development laws varies as a function of overall bit density in a physical system (Fig. 1).
Legend: Matter: electrons (e-L, dark blue) and three R d quarks (dR, yellow). Anti-matter: positrons (e+R, pink) and three L d quarks (dL, light blue). Distribution of elementary particle energy (vertical) changes as a function of overall bit density (horizontal). SVUF (left) and VSUF (right) bit operations order.
Methods and Results
A simulated 64x64x64 spot volume was incrementally increased in 1-state bit density starting near absolute vacuum (0.001), using the Binary Mechanics Lab Simulator v1.37.0, as described elsewhere [5] [6]. Bits randomly added to the simulated volume were distributed approximately equally to the spots representing the eight elementary particle types. Thus, at near zero proportion of maximum bit density at the left in Fig. 1, each graphed item starts at one eighth (0.125) of the total energy (1-state bits) populating the volume. About 1000 simulator Ticks were run to increase the proportion of maximum bit density to almost one. Notice that as the upper half of the bit density range commences to the right sides in Fig. 1, the proportion of total energy for each particle type eventually trends toward 0.125 and uncondensed phases of energy may be represented.
Previous attempts to account for incidence of elementary particle types as a function of volume bit density focused on counting mite (fermion) bits only [6]. These studies revealed that matter prevalence over antimatter was an ongoing process in the present [7], addressing the previously unexplained matter-antimatter asymmetry phenomenon. In contrast, the present study counts all bits per spot type, both mites (fermion) and lites (boson) to reveal the remarkable distribution of total energy among particle types in Fig. 1.
Prior test runs showed that the three R-handed d quarks (red, green, blue) had approximately equal energy densities. The three L-handed d quarks also showed similar values. Thus, the dR (yellow) and dL (light blue) data in Fig. 1 represent the averages of the three types in each group. In sum, four types of energy spectrum as a function of volume energy density were identified and each type was associated with a single lepton (e-L or e+R) particle or group of three elementary d quark particles (dR or dL).
Gross inspection of Fig. 1 suggests two pairs of particle type energy spectrums over the entire bit density range from absolute vacuum to maximum possible energy density. First, the matter dR group spectrum is approximately the inverse of the anti-matter positron e+R spectrum. Thus, the time-development laws appear to favor populating dR positions in the proton bit cycle over positron positions [8]. Second, the antimatter dL group spectrum is inverse to some visible extent to the matter electron e-L again suggesting that some energy loss from electrons is accumulated in the dL spectrum. Note the dR and dL spectrums are averages of three particles and hence, their plot in Fig. 1 does not reflect the total number of 1-state bits (3x), compared to the single particle lepton spectrums.
[Update: At present, the one and only physically correct bit operations order is thought to be SUVF. Hence, this experiment (#2 in the BMLS Interface program bmls.exe) was run with Binary Mechanics Lab Simulator v2.2 with SUVF bit operations order (Fig. 2) with dramatically different results than seen previously (Fig. 1).
Legend: Matter: electrons (e-L, dark blue) and three R d quarks (dR, yellow). Anti-matter: positrons (e+R, pink) and three L d quarks (dL, light blue). Distribution of elementary particle energy (vertical) changes as a function of overall bit density (horizontal). SUVF bit operations order.
Below about 0.2 energy density, the d quark distributions (dR and dL) were close to the expected value (0.125 = 1/8th of total), electron (e-L) energy content was above expected and positron (e+R) energy content was below expected. As energy density was increased above about 0.2 of the maximum, matter d quark (dR) energy content increased at the expense of falling energies of electrons, positrons and antimatter d quarks (dL). Minimum and maximum electron energies were at approximately 0.29 and 0.69 energy densities respectively. Minimum and maximum positron energies were at approximately 0.41 and 0.72 energy densities respectively. The accumulation of energy in matter d quarks peaked at about 0.41 on the energy density scale, where positron energy was minimum. Meanwhile, antimatter d quark (dL) energies continued to decrease to a minimum at 0.67 as energy density was increased. Finally, at higher energy densities, the leptons (e-L and e+R) showed marked higher energy content, as both d quark groups (dR and dL) dropped below the expected level (0.125).
Legend: Proton-electron distance between centers of energy quanta in proton and electron bit cycles, in primary length constant L units
Fig. 3 illustrates current definitions of energy density ranges based on output data from BMLS experiment 2. Absolute maximum temperature occurs at the plasma-soup border at about 0.75 density.]
Discussion
New Rosetta Stone. Each spot spatial object consists of three perpendicular spot units. A spot unit contains two binary bits -- mite (fermion) and lite (boson). Hence, each spot may contain zero to six bits and the pattern is called a bit function describing the system state. The fundamental bit operations (unconditional, scalar, vector and strong) applied in quantized time units t produce exact time development of the state of any physical system.
Analysis of the physical representation of the eight elementary particles has revealed that they are not as elementary as previously thought. Indeed, four types of spot unit were found to account for the eight so-called elementary particles (Fig. 4 from [2]) suggesting a new, more elemental level of analysis of physical phenomena -- perhaps the most exciting frontier for investigation in contemporary physics.
In summary, data show that four types of spatial objects called spot units are the fundamental building blocks of the universe and that each of these types is associated with an elementary particle category exhibiting a unique signature energy spectrum measured over the possible bit density range. For further investigation in this cutting-edge frontier in modern physics, one can think of dozens of top priority research proposals, Masters and PhD theses. A top priority is to demonstrate that any physical phenomenon can be duplicated by the time-evolution laws of BM and the correct bit operations order [9]. Thus, there are opportunities in all sub-specialties in physics.
Meanwhile, Back in the 20th Century. Let us go back to the past for a moment much as an anthropologist might presently visit a less advanced tribe to observe their superstitions. In a mind experiment, draw a vertical line in Fig. 2 or 3, say, at 0.5, 0.7 or 0.9 of maximum energy density to depict the latest efforts at facilities like CERN. The boosted LHC energy beams will see things along this vertical line of energy density -- a primitive, keyhole look at the big picture. News reports say new particles will be sought, but this seems completely trivial in comparison, given that the proton bit cycle [8] can be used to enumerate all possible hadron phenomena on a lap-top. Even worse, this research focus goes in the opposite direction -- using the LHC instead of a lap-top to itemize more macroscopic objects composed of the eight elementary particles.
Consider: 1) If electron, proton accelerators have achieved velocities very close to light speed (e.g., > 99%), would this not locate the beam energy density at the far right of Fig. 3 near maximum? 2) If this is true, then the beams hitting targets are not electrons or protons as commonly understood, but rather a high energy soup beam (also known as quark-gluon soup). 3) It follows that these particle accelerator labs do not know exactly what is in fact colliding. 4) Hence, many supposed particle interactions may be pure conjecture and the usefulness of highest energy particle collisions as a research tool may have reached a limit.
In contrast, in this 21st century, as the Standard Model is upgraded with quantized space, time and energy "installed", nuclear physics is becoming essentially a book-keeping exercise, releasing vast intellectual talent and resources in the physics community to address more fundamental questions in science. Will investigators turn around and look at more fundamental, microscopic levels and address the challenge of understanding the smallest elementary objects in physics -- spot units?
References
[1] Keene, J. J. "Binary mechanics" J. Bin. Mech. July, 2010.
[2] Keene, J. J. "Spot unit components of elementary particles" J. Bin. Mech. October, 2014.
[3] Keene, J. J. "Physical interpretation of binary mechanical space" J. Bin. Mech. February, 2011.
[4] Keene, J. J. "Fundamental forces in physics" J. Bin. Mech. October, 2014.
[5] Keene, J. J. "If you want to keep your Higgs boson..." J. Bin. Mech. March, 2015.
[6] Keene, J. J. "Absolute maximum temperature" J. Bin. Mech. March, 2011.
[7] Keene, J. J. "Matter-antimatter asymmetry mechanism" J. Bin. Mech. October, 2014.
[8] Keene, J. J. "Proton and electron bit cycles" J. Bin. Mech. April, 2015.
[9] Keene, J. J. "Bit operations order" J. Bin. Mech. May, 2011.
© 2015 James J Keene
