On Tuesday, February 28, 2023 at 7:28:18 PM UTC-7, Dono. wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, February 28, 2023 at 6:16:45 PM UTC-8, Gary Harnagel wrote:
> >
> > On Tuesday, February 28, 2023 at 5:39:18 PM UTC-7, Dono. wrote:
> > >
> > > I am a Dumbfuck,
> >
> > < ALL of his pathetic imbecilities snipped>
> >
> > No grist for discussion
>
> Well, I also exposed your newest idiocy. You see , Gary, every time you try to weasel
> out from a prior mistake, to cover a prior mistake, you make a fresh one. This what
> makes you the second entertaining crank, Richard Hertz is still the top crank. What
> makes you both so entertaining is that you post calculations. Full of interesting
> mistakes.

So have YOU admitted YOU mistakes, which are MUCH bigger than mine?

*How about your false assertion that the tritium decay mass determinations (m_nu^2)
were the differences between the square of the masses of the three flavors?*

*How about your false assertion that the U_ei values could be imaginary?*

*How about your false assertion that "Neutrinos are not tachyons, their measured
speed is less than c"?*

Those were BIG mistakes. Mine are small ones.

“And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the
beam that is in thine own eye?” Matt. 7:3

"Sociopaths have no regard for others’ rights or feelings, lack empathy and remorse
for wrongdoings, and have the need to exploit and manipulate others for personal gain."

My, but that sounds familiar :-)

And here's a little jewel of yours from 5/31/21:

"(m_12)^2=(m_1)^2-(m_2)^2
"(m_23)^2=(m_2)^2-(m_3)^2
"(m_31)^2=(m_3)^2-(m_1)^2"

The absolute value signs are (gasp) MISSING. And then you wrote:

"Obviously, (m_ij)^2 above can have any sign, INCLUDING negative. That doesn't mean that
the squared mass of the neutrino can be negative, as you keep claiming"

6/8/21:

"I told you already that the above mentioned experiments do not measure neutrino mass
because it is not measurable since neutrino oscillates between three different flavors ,
each one with its own mass. What is being measured is the differences (m_i)^2-(m_j)^2,
i,i =1,2,3 and these differences can be either positive or negative.

You have a LOT to apologize for :-))

5/23/21:
"Tachyons would exhibit the unusual property of increasing in speed as their energy decreases,
going to infinity when their speed is going to c. This means that it would take infinite energy to
slow down to the speed of light. This means that it is impossible to detect the tachyons."

This a flagrant example of disregarding the law of the excluded middle since c < u < infinity is
nonzero and non-infinite.

You later said:

'"I explained why no one can conceive any experiment that would detect 'tachyons'"

As usual, your "explanation" was false, yet you kept patting yourself on the back for such bull
poop.

> Keep it up.

I plan to. I think a paper on "Tritium beta decay experiments and the possibility that
neutrinos may be tachyons" is in order.

On Wednesday, March 1, 2023 at 11:55:56 AM UTC-8, Gary Harnagel wrote:

> *How about your false assertion that the tritium decay mass determinations (m_nu^2)
> were the differences between the square of the masses of the three flavors?*
>

Pairs of flavors. You are digging yourself deeper, crank.

> *How about your false assertion that the U_ei values could be imaginary?*
>

Some of the U_ei ARE imaginary. You need to learn before you keep digging yourself deeper.

> *How about your false assertion that "Neutrinos are not tachyons, their measured
> speed is less than c"?*
>

You need to stop this imbecility, neutrinos are not tachyons, you are digging yourself deeper. Do you want a shovel?

> "I told you already that the above mentioned experiments do not measure neutrino mass
> because it is not measurable since neutrino oscillates between three different flavors ,
> each one with its own mass.

Perfectly true. What is is measured is neutrino EFFECTIVE mass. I thought that you finally learned that.

> "Tachyons would exhibit the unusual property of increasing in speed as their energy decreases,
> going to infinity when their speed is going to c. This means that it would take infinite energy to
> slow down to the speed of light. This means that it is impossible to detect the tachyons."
>

Absolutely correct. This is taken from mainstream literature.

> '"I explained why no one can conceive any experiment that would detect 'tachyons'"
>

Also taken from mainstream literature.

> I plan to. I think a paper on "Tritium beta decay experiments and the possibility that
> neutrinos may be tachyons" is in order.

As I said, keep it up, dumbestfuck!. That is, digging yourself deeper.

On Wednesday, March 1, 2023 at 1:11:47 PM UTC-7, Dono. wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, March 1, 2023 at 11:55:56 AM UTC-8, Gary Harnagel wrote:
> >
> > *How about your false assertion that the tritium decay mass determinations (m_nu^2)
> > were the differences between the square of the masses of the three flavors?*
>
> Pairs of flavors. You are digging yourself deeper, crank.

Nope. You are compromised because of your deeply prejudiced opinions. You KNOW
that I know it's m_i^2 - m_j^2. Don't bluster and pretend, hypocrite.

> > *How about your false assertion that the U_ei values could be imaginary?*
> >
> Some of the U_ei ARE imaginary.

Nope. The U_ei are products of the sines and cosines of the mixing angles, This is a
perfect example of your making stuff up and pretending it's true.

> You need to learn before you keep digging yourself deeper.

Only in your fantasies, Dishonest Dono.

> > *How about your false assertion that "Neutrinos are not tachyons, their measured
> > speed is less than c"?*
>
> You need to stop this imbecility, neutrinos are not tachyons,

There is NO proof of that. They MAY not be tachyons but the jury is still out, and YOU
are DEFINITELY NOT on the jury.

> you are digging yourself deeper. Do you want a shovel?

No thanks. Do you need a really tall ladder to get out of the hole you've already dug
yourself into? Stop fantasizing and get a life.

> > "I told you already that the above mentioned experiments do not measure neutrino mass
> > because it is not measurable since neutrino oscillates between three different flavors ,
> > each one with its own mass.
>
> Perfectly true. What is is measured is neutrino EFFECTIVE mass. I thought that you finally
> learned that.

You lie like a rug. It is a GIANT "mistake" that neutrino mass "is not measurable." THAT's what
you said that is dead wrong. You're worse than a liar because you NEVER admit when you're
wrong.

> > "Tachyons would exhibit the unusual property of increasing in speed as their energy decreases,
> > going to infinity when their speed is going to c. This means that it would take infinite energy to
> > slow down to the speed of light. This means that it is impossible to detect the tachyons."
> >
> Absolutely correct. This is taken from mainstream literature.

Absolutely wrong. You are so corrupt it's staggering. You mix truth with fiction and then pretend
it's all true. Remember the law of the excluded middle? You make two true statements:
E(u approaches c) approaches infinity and E(u approaches infinity) approaches zero, then you turn
your whole argument into bull poop by claiming that tachyons can't be detected! By your completely
stupid argument, bradyons couldn't be detected either :-)))

> > '"I explained why no one can conceive any experiment that would detect 'tachyons'"
>
> Also taken from mainstream literature.

So mainstream literature is always correct? What if mainstream literature disagrees with itself
(which it does in this case). Mainstream literature also disagrees on whether or not tachyons
exist. At best, you're cherry-picking. At worst, since you haven't given a link to your "mainstream"
assertion, you're just making stuff up and pretending it's true.

> > Keep it up.
>
> > I plan to. I think a paper on "Tritium beta decay experiments and the possibility that
> > neutrinos may be tachyons" is in order.
>
> As I said, keep it up, dumbestfuck!. That is, digging yourself deeper.

You've already dug YOUR hole and you're squirming around, lying and pretending you're on a
mountaintop. You have NO credibility because you refuse to accept responsibility for your
blunders, doubling down on them even.

On Thursday, March 2, 2023 at 5:23:02 AM UTC-8, Gary Harnagel wrote:

> > Some of the U_ei ARE imaginary.
> Nope. The U_ei are products of the sines and cosines of the mixing angles,

You are still not reading the materials. It is fascinating how deep you dig yourself, crank.

> > You need to stop this imbecility, neutrinos are not tachyons,
> There is NO proof of that. They MAY not be tachyons but the jury is still out, and YOU
> are DEFINITELY NOT on the jury.

Neither are you, crank. Your wishful thinking is making you dig yourself deeper. Bottom line is your crankish idea that KATRIN produced an imaginary mass for electron-neutrino went down in flames.

> > you are digging yourself deeper. Do you want a shovel?
> No thanks. Do you need a really tall ladder to get out of the hole you've already dug
> yourself into? Stop fantasizing and get a life.
> > > "I told you already that the above mentioned experiments do not measure neutrino mass
> > > because it is not measurable since neutrino oscillates between three different flavors ,
> > > each one with its own mass.
> >
> > Perfectly true. What is is measured is neutrino EFFECTIVE mass. I thought that you finally
> > learned that.
> You lie

Crank,

What is being measured is the EFFECTIVE neutrino mass, the blend of the masses of the three neutrino flavors. Nowhere in the KATRIN papers you can find a claim of imaginary neutrino mass. Unlike you, the KATRIN people that you kept siting, are mainstream scientists, not cranks like you.

> > Also taken from mainstream literature.
> So mainstream literature is always correct?

In this case it is. The results from KATRIN are what is shooting down your delusions.

> What if mainstream literature disagrees with itself
> (which it does in this case).

You are going off the deep end. It is sad to see that you were a real scientist once and now you are just a ......sad sack crank.

On Thursday, March 2, 2023 at 7:42:33 AM UTC-7, Dono. wrote:
>
> On Thursday, March 2, 2023 at 5:23:02 AM UTC-8, Gary Harnagel wrote:
> >
> > > Some of the U_ei ARE imaginary.
> >
> > Nope. The U_ei are products of the sines and cosines of the mixing angles,
>
> You are still not reading the materials. It is fascinating how deep you dig
> yourself, crank.

Oh, I HAVE read them. Have YOU? Check it out, slacker:

https://arxiv.org/abs/1910.08332

BTW, have you noticed equation (1):

m_beta^2 = [|Ue1|^2 m_1^2 + |Ue2|^2 m_2^2 + |Ue3|^2 m_3^2]^0.5

All the U_ei values are taken as ABSOLUTE values, so your unfounded assertion
is dead wrong. Dig another foot deeper in your deep, dark hole.

> > > You need to stop this imbecility, neutrinos are not tachyons,
>
> > There is NO proof of that. They MAY not be tachyons but the jury is still out,
> > and YOU are DEFINITELY NOT on the jury.
>
> Neither are you, crank.

You admit it. So neither of us is a juror. I can make a claim that they MAY be tachyons
backed up by the evidence while you make a definite assertion that they are not backed
up by no evidence at all. The BEST you can do honestly is assert that the MAY NOT be
tachyons. Anything stronger is dishonesty.

> Your wishful thinking is making you dig yourself deeper.

Spoken from the deep, dark hole as he keeps on digging :-)

> Bottom line is your crankish idea that KATRIN produced an imaginary mass for electron-
> neutrino went down in flames.

Not at all, Dono. You appear to be clueless about statistics, not understanding what
0.26 +/- 0.34 eV^2 means. Nor that M_1^2 can be more negative than M_beta^2, and
that 0.26 - 0.34 = - 0.08. Did you ever get your GED because you failed arithmetic?

> > > you are digging yourself deeper. Do you want a shovel?
> >
> > No thanks. Do you need a really tall ladder to get out of the hole you've already dug
> > yourself into? Stop fantasizing and get a life.

No answer. Okay, no ladder, stay in your deep, dark hole :-)

> > > > "I told you already that the above mentioned experiments do not measure neutrino mass
> > > > because it is not measurable since neutrino oscillates between three different flavors ,
> > > > each one with its own mass.
> > >
> > > Perfectly true. What is is measured is neutrino EFFECTIVE mass. I thought that you finally
> > > learned that.
>
> > You lie
>
> Crank,

Liar.

> What is being measured is the EFFECTIVE neutrino mass, the blend of the masses of the three
> neutrino flavors.

And the difference between m_beta^2 and m_1^2 is less than the one-sigma error bars of m_beta^2
(+/- 0.34 eV^2). Once again you take an ineffective shot at making a mountain out of a molehill.

> Nowhere in the KATRIN papers you can find a claim of imaginary neutrino mass.

Of course not. They're wary of the brouhaha over the Gran Sasso fiasco. Out of the the 128 authors
of the paper, those that would admit the possibility were outvoted by those who won't. Those not
involved are more vocal, so your assertion is irrelevant and misleading.

> Unlike you, the KATRIN people that you kept siting, are mainstream scientists, not cranks like you.

So let me get this straight: In your bloated opinion, Charles Schwartz, Robert Ehrlich, John Cramer,
Alan Chodos and Alan Kostelecky aren't mainstream scientists. Got it! :-))

> > > Also taken from mainstream literature.
> >
> > So mainstream literature is always correct?
>
> In this case it is.

In your prejudiced opinion.

> The results from KATRIN are what is shooting down your delusions.

Not at all. You just don't understand the statistical nature of measurement science.

> > What if mainstream literature disagrees with itself
> > (which it does in this case).
>
> You are going off the deep end. It is sad to see that you were a real scientist once
> and now you are just a ......sad sack crank.

You don't appear to have EVER been a scientist. At least you admit that I once was one :-))
So why would anyone accept your unsubstantiated opinions.

"You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion.
No one is entitled to be ignorant." — Harlan Ellison

But even if you're opinion IS "informed," it doesn't give you the right to denigrate others.

"Today I bent the truth to be kind, and I have no regret, for I am
far surer of what is kind than I am of what is true." -- Robert Brault

I tried being kind with you, but it doesn't work on a sociopath.

On Thursday, March 2, 2023 at 1:31:46 PM UTC-8, Gary Harnagel wrote:
> On Thursday, March 2, 2023 at 7:42:33 AM UTC-7, Dono. wrote:
> >
> > On Thursday, March 2, 2023 at 5:23:02 AM UTC-8, Gary Harnagel wrote:
> > >
> > > > Some of the U_ei ARE imaginary.
> > >
> > > Nope. The U_ei are products of the sines and cosines of the mixing angles,
> >
> > You are still not reading the materials. It is fascinating how deep you dig
> > yourself, crank.
> Oh, I HAVE read them. Have YOU? Check it out, slacker:
>
> https://arxiv.org/abs/1910.08332
>
> BTW, have you noticed equation (1):
>
> m_beta^2 = [|Ue1|^2 m_1^2 + |Ue2|^2 m_2^2 + |Ue3|^2 m_3^2]^0.5
>

The authors did not write the above idiocy. The above idiocy is all yours

> All the U_ei values are taken as ABSOLUTE values, so your unfounded assertion
> is dead wrong. Dig another foot deeper in your deep, dark hole.

Dumbestfuck

m_3>>m_1 and m_3>>m_2 (the mass of the tau neutrino is much bigger than the masses of the other two flavors). Yet m_beta^2 is very close to zero or even negative. How do you figure this happened? Hint: you are the one failing basic arithmetic.

> > Bottom line is your crankish idea that KATRIN produced an imaginary mass for electron-
> > neutrino went down in flames.
> M_1^2 can be more negative than M_beta^2, and

Not one KATRIN paper claims such insanity. Actually neither do any other group. Only the village clown Gary Harnagel claims such insanity.

> > What is being measured is the EFFECTIVE neutrino mass, the blend of the masses of the three
> > neutrino flavors.
> And the difference between m_beta^2 and m_1^2 is less than the one-sigma error bars of m_beta^2
> (+/- 0.34 eV^2).

Dumbestfuck

m_3>>m_1 and m_3>>m_2 (the mass of the tau neutrino is much bigger than the masses of the other two flavors). Yet m_beta^2 is very close to zero or even negative. That has absolutely nothing to do with m_1 being close to |m_beta| , let alone to m_1 being imaginary. The problem with you, Gary, is not only that you are agnorant but you are also a cheater, you try to force science to fit your narrative.

> > Nowhere in the KATRIN papers you can find a claim of imaginary neutrino mass.
> Of course not. They're wary of the brouhaha over the Gran Sasso fiasco. Out of the the 128 authors
> of the paper, those that would admit the possibility were outvoted by those who won't.

You are not in position to make ASSertions about the KATRIN group. They are mainstrteam scientists, you are just a sad sack crank.

> > The results from KATRIN are what is shooting down your delusions.
> Not at all. You just don't understand the statistical nature of measurement science.

Well, you will have to show any experimental proof that backs up your crankery that m_1 (or m_2) is imaginary.

> > You are going off the deep end. It is sad to see that you were a real scientist once
> > and now you are just a ......sad sack crank.
> You don't appear to have EVER been a scientist. At least you admit that I once was one :-))
> So why would anyone accept your unsubstantiated opinions.
>

That makes it even more embarrassing for you, a mere amateur has exposed the crankeries of a former scientist, you. It showcases your mental degradation and the extends you are wiling to lie in order to justify a crankish narrative.
> "You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion.
> No one is entitled to be ignorant." — Harlan Ellison
>

But you are an "agnorrant", i.e. an arrogant (i.e. entitled) ignorant.

> But even if you're opinion IS "informed," it doesn't give you the right to denigrate others.
>
Yet, this is exactly what you have been doing in your desperation to justify your crank theory. Mind you, even if tachyons existed, your paper still fails spectacularly due to your errors in the Minkowski diagrams. You fail basic relativity, Gary. .

On Tuesday, February 21, 2023 at 7:18:34 PM UTC-8, Gary Harnagel wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 21, 2023 at 6:08:13 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > You can't give them rest mass if they all are moving near light speed.
> > Something had to accelerate them. What was that?
> Not so Mitch. Rest mass is m = sqrt(E^2 - p^c^2)/c^2
>
> And nobody GIVES particles mass: they either have it or they don't.

What about light stored in the atom?
It has the standard for having mass
by moving below the speed of light.

Mitchell Raemsch

On Thursday, March 2, 2023 at 5:51:34 PM UTC-7, Dono. wrote:
>
> On Thursday, March 2, 2023 at 1:31:46 PM UTC-8, Gary Harnagel wrote:
> >
> > On Thursday, March 2, 2023 at 7:42:33 AM UTC-7, Dono. wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thursday, March 2, 2023 at 5:23:02 AM UTC-8, Gary Harnagel wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Some of the U_ei ARE imaginary.
> > > >
> > > > Nope. The U_ei are products of the sines and cosines of the mixing angles,
> > >
> > > You are still not reading the materials. It is fascinating how deep you dig
> > > yourself, crank.
> >
> > Oh, I HAVE read them. Have YOU? Check it out, slacker:
> >
> > https://arxiv.org/abs/1910.08332
> >
> > BTW, have you noticed equation (1):
> >
> > m_beta^2 = [|Ue1|^2 m_1^2 + |Ue2|^2 m_2^2 + |Ue3|^2 m_3^2]^0.5
> >
> The authors did not write the above idiocy.

Oh, good grief. I supply a link to the KATRIN paper, identify the equation IN
the paper and copy it so it's right before your eyes and you deny it! No one
can have an honest discussion with someone is such an outrageous liar!

Oops, I had a typo. Please remove the ^0.5.

> The above idiocy is all yours

If you're attributing a typo to idiocy, you are very deceitful. That is sociopathic
behavior.

> > All the U_ei values are taken as ABSOLUTE values, so your unfounded assertion
> > is dead wrong. Dig another foot deeper in your deep, dark hole.
>
> Dumbestfuck

Liar and hypocrite

> m_3>>m_1 and m_3>>m_2 (the mass of the tau neutrino is much bigger than the masses
> of the other two flavors).

Complete bull poop, Dono. You should know better than to tell such transparent lies. You
KNOW VERY WELL that |m_21^2| = 7.4e-5 eV^2 and |m_32|^2 = .00251 eV^2. In case you
need your memory refreshed: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrino

So m_2^2 = m_1^2 +/- 7.5e-5. So if m1^2 = 0.2 eV^2 then m_2^2 <= 0.200075.

And m_3^2 = m_2^2 +/- .00251 <= 0.200075 + 0.00252 = 0.202595 eV^2.

> Yet m_beta^2 is very close to zero or even negative. How do you figure this happened?
> Hint: you are the one failing basic arithmetic.

:-))))) Dono, that is really, really pathetic. Face it. You LIED.

> > > Bottom line is your crankish idea that KATRIN produced an imaginary mass for electron-
> > > neutrino went down in flames.
> >
> > M_1^2 can be more negative than M_beta^2, and
>
> Not one KATRIN paper claims such insanity.

Equation (1) in the KATRIN paper linked above (the equation that you claimed wasn't there)
obviously proves I'm right:

m_beta^2 = |U_e1|^2 m_1^2 + |U_e2|^2 m_2^2 + |U_e3|^2 m_3^2

m_beta^2 = |U_e1|^2 m_1*2 + |U_e2|^2 (m_1^2 +/- 7.4e-5) + |U_e3^2| (m1^2 +/- 7.4e^-5 +/- 2.51e-3)

m_beta^2 = m1^2 ( |U_e1|^2 + |U_e2|^2 + |U_e3|^2) +/- 7.4e-5 |U_e2|^2 +/- 2.510074e-3 |U_e3^2|

Since the last two terms on the right are quite small, and SUM(U_ei^2) is about 1.6, then m_beta^2 is
a bit larger than m1^2, or a bit more negative than m_1^2 if m_1^2 is negative.

I mistakenly said that they were closer together than that, but m_1^2 can certainly be negative
when m_beta^2 is negative.
> Actually neither do any other group. Only the village clown Gary Harnagel claims such insanity.

Ah, so it's "groups now, since I showed you that individual scientists destroyed your previous asinine
assertion. Perhaps you've noticed that I'm not a group, so you're dishonestly (as usual) making
false comparisons.

> > > What is being measured is the EFFECTIVE neutrino mass, the blend of the masses of the three
> > > neutrino flavors.
> >
> > And the difference between m_beta^2 and m_1^2 is less than the one-sigma error bars of m_beta^2
> > (+/- 0.34 eV^2).
>
> Dumbestfuck

Hypocrite.

> m_3>>m_1 and m_3>>m_2 (the mass of the tau neutrino is much bigger than the masses of the other
> two flavors). Yet m_beta^2 is very close to zero or even negative.

Repeating falsehoods doesn't make them true.

> That has absolutely nothing to do with m_1 being close to |m_beta| , let alone to m_1 being imaginary.

> Look at the math on that. Read 'em and weep.

> The problem with you, Gary, is not only that you are agnorant but you are also a cheater, you try to force
> science to fit your narrative.

Pot, kettle, black :-))

> > > Nowhere in the KATRIN papers you can find a claim of imaginary neutrino mass.
> >
> > Of course not. They're wary of the brouhaha over the Gran Sasso fiasco. Out of the the 128 authors
> > of the paper, those that would admit the possibility were outvoted by those who won't.
>
> You are not in position to make ASSertions about the KATRIN group.

Pot, kettle, black. You make the asinine assertion that all 128 authors are in complete agreement.

> They are mainstrteam scientists,

Some are engineers and some may be technicians.

> you are just a sad sack crank.

And everyone knows that your opinions are based on extreme prejudice.

> > > The results from KATRIN are what is shooting down your delusions.
> >
> > Not at all. You just don't understand the statistical nature of measurement science.
>
> Well, you will have to show any experimental proof that backs up your crankery that
> m_1 (or m_2) is imaginary.

You are wrong, illogical one. I'm merely saying that neutrinos MAY be tachyons. You,
OTOH, are ASSERTING that they definitely aren't tachyons. YOU are the one that is
being unscientific.

“There is generally an inverse relationship between confidence and
intelligence.” – Jean Campbell

> > > You are going off the deep end. It is sad to see that you were a real scientist once
> > > and now you are just a ......sad sack crank.
> >
> > You don't appear to have EVER been a scientist. At least you admit that I once was one :-))
> > So why would anyone accept your unsubstantiated opinions.
>
> That makes it even more embarrassing for you, a mere amateur has exposed the crankeries
> of a former scientist, you.

So you admit to being a mere amateur. Good to know. No wonder you made so many blunders
about neutrinos, tachyons and many other things. And you're also wrong about m_3^2 being
much, much greater than m_1^2. In fact, all three are very close together in mass, a fact which
totally escaped your amateur mind.

> It showcases your mental degradation and the extends you are wiling to lie in order to justify
> a crankish narrative.

I've made mistakes but I haven't lied, Dissembling Dono.

> > "You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion.
> > No one is entitled to be ignorant." — Harlan Ellison
>
> But you are an "agnorrant", i.e. an arrogant (i.e. entitled) ignorant.

:-)) You're woefully outclassed, Dono. I guess that's why you have to lie so much.

> > But even if you're opinion IS "informed," it doesn't give you the right to denigrate others.
> >
> Yet, this is exactly what you have been doing in your desperation to justify your crank
> theory.

I figured that you would try THAT bull poop. So you believe you can flagrantly lie about
physics and play the personal attack game, but not get the same in return. My, you must
REALLY feel priviliged :-))

> Mind you, even if tachyons existed, your paper still fails spectacularly due to your errors
> in the Minkowski diagrams.

You keep repeating that demented bull poop, and with out anything to back it up. The peer
reviewer thought they were just fine, arrogant amateur.

You fail basic relativity, Gary. .

The peer reviewer didn't think so. You, OTOH, fail neutrino science, algebra, arithmetic and
honesty.

On Thursday, March 2, 2023 at 8:26:38 PM UTC-8, Gary Harnagel wrote:
> On Thursday, March 2, 2023 at 5:51:34 PM UTC-7, Dono. wrote:
> >
> > On Thursday, March 2, 2023 at 1:31:46 PM UTC-8, Gary Harnagel wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thursday, March 2, 2023 at 7:42:33 AM UTC-7, Dono. wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thursday, March 2, 2023 at 5:23:02 AM UTC-8, Gary Harnagel wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Some of the U_ei ARE imaginary.
> > > > >
> > > > > Nope. The U_ei are products of the sines and cosines of the mixing angles,
> > > >
> > > > You are still not reading the materials. It is fascinating how deep you dig
> > > > yourself, crank.
> > >
> > > Oh, I HAVE read them. Have YOU? Check it out, slacker:
> > >
> > > https://arxiv.org/abs/1910.08332
> > >
> > > BTW, have you noticed equation (1):
> > >
> > > m_beta^2 = [|Ue1|^2 m_1^2 + |Ue2|^2 m_2^2 + |Ue3|^2 m_3^2]^0.5
> > >
> > The authors did not write the above idiocy.
> Oh, good grief. I supply a link to the KATRIN paper, identify the equation IN
> the paper and copy it so it's right before your eyes and you deny it! No one
> can have an honest discussion with someone is such an outrageous liar!
>
> Oops, I had a typo. Please remove the ^0.5.

You pulled the trigger to quickly, crank.

> > The above idiocy is all yours
> If you're attributing a typo to idiocy, you are very deceitful. That is sociopathic
> behavior.
> > > All the U_ei values are taken as ABSOLUTE values, so your unfounded assertion
> > > is dead wrong. Dig another foot deeper in your deep, dark hole.
> >
> > Dumbestfuck

> So m_2^2 = m_1^2 +/- 7.5e-5. So if m1^2 = 0.2 eV^2 then m_2^2 <= 0.200075.
>

You are doing the imbecility I flagged again, you cannot do:

m_2^2=m_1^2+|m_2^2-m_1^2|

> And m_3^2 = m_2^2 +/- .00251 <= 0.200075 + 0.00252 = 0.202595 eV^2.

Same problem as above. Repeating imbecilities doesn't make them true.

> Equation (1) in the KATRIN paper linked above (the equation that you claimed wasn't there)
> obviously proves I'm right:
>
> m_beta^2 = |U_e1|^2 m_1^2 + |U_e2|^2 m_2^2 + |U_e3|^2 m_3^2
>
> m_beta^2 = |U_e1|^2 m_1*2 + |U_e2|^2 (m_1^2 +/- 7.4e-5) + |U_e3^2| (m1^2 +/- 7.4e^-5 +/- 2.51e-3)
>
> m_beta^2 = m1^2 ( |U_e1|^2 + |U_e2|^2 + |U_e3|^2) +/- 7.4e-5 |U_e2|^2 +/- 2.510074e-3 |U_e3^2|
>

Same imbecility as above. You failed basic algebra, crank.

> Since the last two terms on the right are quite small, and SUM(U_ei^2) is about 1.6, then m_beta^2 is
> a bit larger than m1^2, or a bit more negative than m_1^2 if m_1^2 is negative.
>
> I mistakenly said that they were closer together than that, but m_1^2 can certainly be negative
> when m_beta^2 is negative.

Nope, because this is not how the m_i^2 are obtained from the m_beta^2. You refuse to learn and you keep using your incorrect hacks.

> > That makes it even more embarrassing for you, a mere amateur has exposed the crankeries
> > of a former scientist, you.
> So you admit to being a mere amateur.

Yes. Which makes it even more embarrassing for you. You are being shown wrong by an amateur.

> I've made mistakes but I haven't lied,

You lie continuously , Gary.

> The peer reviewer thought they were just fine, a
> You fail basic relativity, Gary. .
> The peer reviewer didn't think so.

So, Gary, vixra has peer reviewers now? Interesting

On 1/16/2023 2:09 AM, Hannu Poropudas wrote:
> If photon rest mass is zero then rest masses of all types of neutrinos is zero?
>
> In one H-M's old drawing about photon (dark light photon?)
> of contracting part of the Universe, this photon (dark light photon?)
> is such that it consists only color right-neutrinos with
> color-small-right-neutrinos.
>
> If photon (light photon) of expanding part of the Universe would be similar
> but consisting only color-wrong-neutrinos, then all these color-wrong-neutrinos
> would have zero rest mass ?
>
> This would mean that also rest mass differences of all color-wrong-neutrinos
> would be also zero ?
>
> If true, this would mean also that no neutrino oscillation (
> color-wrong-neutrino) would exist?
>
>
> This old H-M's drawing is public in Hannu Poropudas Facebook page.
>
> I would like to call all these H-M's old drawings "axioms of astrophysics".

Is there such thing as a system that is not in motion?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-point_energy

On Thursday, March 2, 2023 at 9:26:38 PM UTC-7, Gary Harnagel wrote:
> ....
> Since the last two terms on the right are quite small, and SUM(U_ei^2) is about
> 1.6,

Correction. SUM(U_ei^2) = 1.00

> then m_beta^2 is a bit larger than m1^2, or a bit more negative than m_1^2 if m_1^2
> is negative.

Still correct, but even closer to each other.

> I mistakenly said that they were closer together than that, but m_1^2 can certainly be
> negative when m_beta^2 is negative.

On Thursday, March 2, 2023 at 10:49:22 PM UTC-8, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> On 1/16/2023 2:09 AM, Hannu Poropudas wrote:
> > If photon rest mass is zero then rest masses of all types of neutrinos is zero?
> >
> > In one H-M's old drawing about photon (dark light photon?)
> > of contracting part of the Universe, this photon (dark light photon?)
> > is such that it consists only color right-neutrinos with
> > color-small-right-neutrinos.
> >
> > If photon (light photon) of expanding part of the Universe would be similar
> > but consisting only color-wrong-neutrinos, then all these color-wrong-neutrinos
> > would have zero rest mass ?
> >
> > This would mean that also rest mass differences of all color-wrong-neutrinos
> > would be also zero ?
> >
> > If true, this would mean also that no neutrino oscillation (
> > color-wrong-neutrino) would exist?
> >
> >
> > This old H-M's drawing is public in Hannu Poropudas Facebook page.
> >
> > I would like to call all these H-M's old drawings "axioms of astrophysics".
>
> Is there such thing as a system that is not in motion?
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-point_energy

If light energy is non zero so is its mass equivalence quantity.

Mitchell Raemsch

perjantai 3. maaliskuuta 2023 klo 8.49.22 UTC+2 Chris M. Thomasson kirjoitti:
> On 1/16/2023 2:09 AM, Hannu Poropudas wrote:
> > If photon rest mass is zero then rest masses of all types of neutrinos is zero?
> >
> > In one H-M's old drawing about photon (dark light photon?)
> > of contracting part of the Universe, this photon (dark light photon?)
> > is such that it consists only color right-neutrinos with
> > color-small-right-neutrinos.
> >
> > If photon (light photon) of expanding part of the Universe would be similar
> > but consisting only color-wrong-neutrinos, then all these color-wrong-neutrinos
> > would have zero rest mass ?
> >
> > This would mean that also rest mass differences of all color-wrong-neutrinos
> > would be also zero ?
> >
> > If true, this would mean also that no neutrino oscillation (
> > color-wrong-neutrino) would exist?
> >
> >
> > This old H-M's drawing is public in Hannu Poropudas Facebook page.
> >
> > I would like to call all these H-M's old drawings "axioms of astrophysics".
>
> Is there such thing as a system that is not in motion?
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-point_energy

I used words "axioms of astrophysics" which one should be thinking what this means ?

How Heisenberg's uncertainty principle is accounted in the modified
(only by constant which I gave, this was my guess of needed mathematics)
nonlinear Dirac's equation?

I found one interesting discussion (based our present known physics/cosmology?)
from the year 2022 about your question ?

https://www.quora.com/Are-there-things-in-the-universe-that-are-not-in-motion-If-so-which-ones

Hannu

maanantai 27. helmikuuta 2023 klo 11.44.15 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> keskiviikko 22. helmikuuta 2023 klo 12.17.05 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > maanantai 20. helmikuuta 2023 klo 12.36.00 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > lauantai 21. tammikuuta 2023 klo 10.57.48 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > > perjantai 20. tammikuuta 2023 klo 9.25.28 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > > > tiistai 17. tammikuuta 2023 klo 11.32.43 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > > > > tiistai 17. tammikuuta 2023 klo 10.27.35 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > > > > > maanantai 16. tammikuuta 2023 klo 19.42.24 UTC+2 Tom Roberts kirjoitti:
> > > > > > > > On 1/16/23 4:09 AM, Hannu Poropudas wrote:
> > > > > > > > > If photon rest mass is zero then rest masses of all types of
> > > > > > > > > neutrinos is zero?
> > > > > > > > No.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Neutrinos are observed to oscillate -- they change flavor as they
> > > > > > > > propagate over distance. This is modeled as flavor eigenstates being
> > > > > > > > different from mass eigenstates. That directly implies that at least two
> > > > > > > > neutrino mass eigenstates (out of three) have nonzero mass; it is likely
> > > > > > > > that all three have nonzero mass. Flavor eigenstates do not have a
> > > > > > > > definite mass. Note that flavor eigenstates appear in the Lagrangian and
> > > > > > > > are how interactions occur, while mass eigenstates describe how they
> > > > > > > > propagate over distance.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Tom Roberts
> > > > > > > 1. Deficit in the flux of solar neutrinos observed - YES.
> > > > > > > 2. Deficit in the flux of muon neutrinos in case of atmospheric neutrinos observed - YES.
> > > > > > > 3. Deficit in the flux of reactor electron anti-neutrinos observed - YES.
> > > > > > > 4. Deficit in the flux of particle accelerator beam muon neutrinos observed - YES.
> > > > > > > 5. Deficit in the flux of particle accelerator beam of tau neutrinos observed - YES.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The claim neutrinos change flavor - NO.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If I remember right
> > > > > > > (correctness of this my memory picture this should be checked from my old postings)
> > > > > > > that in old H-M's drawing the space-potato particle those neutrinos are always grouped three
> > > > > > > different color neutrinos together ? I don't know what this could mean ?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > New explanations are needed to explain 1.- 4. above ?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I don't understand what is mass eigenstate/s of neutrino/s ?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Could this be something similar that photon has quantum mechanical mass
> > > > > > > m = h*v/c^2, but this is not rest mass of photon which is zero
> > > > > > > (special relativity says that rest mass of photon is m0 = 0 )?
> > > > > > > (h = Plack's constant, v = frequency of light, c = speed of light in vacuum)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hannu
> > > > > > I found one old posting of mine from sci.physics Google Group.
> > > > > > Here seems to be something about groupings of color wrong neutrinos
> > > > > > and color right neutrinos and color small right neutrinos.
> > > > > > I don't understand what these color groupings mean?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I put COPY of it here below
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Reference:
> > > > > > Hannu Poropudas, 2003.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Re: About Solar Neutrino Problem
> > > > > > sci.physics, Google Groups, Oct 3, 2003, 11:23:15 AM
> > > > > > hannu.p...@osakk.fi's profile photo
> > > > > > hannu.p...@osakk.fi
> > > > > > unread,
> > > > > > Oct 3, 2003, 11:23:15 AM
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > basti...@gmx.net (Bastian) wrote in message news:<44d6926c.03100...@posting.google.com>...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Seems to me you mix up a couple of things. Here an explanation:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 1) Yes there is an neutrino flux. The fusion processes in the sun
> > > > > > > generate this flux. Without the fusion processes the sun would
> > > > > > > collaps. BUT this neutrino flux
> > > > > > > is emitted isotropically - and of course there is nothing like a
> > > > > > > "center of the space".
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 2) There are three species of neutrinos (very well known from the
> > > > > > > measurement of the Z^0 -resonance at CERN). There is a small unlikely
> > > > > > > possibility for a 4th generation of very heavy neutrinos (nu-mass >
> > > > > > > Z^0-mass).
> > > > > > > All neutrinos are left-handed. What does it mean? Neutrinos have spin
> > > > > > > (spin 1/2). For massless particles the spin could be aligned or
> > > > > > > anti-aligned with the direction of the movement (actually one would
> > > > > > > rather speak about helicity a which is the spin projection into the
> > > > > > > direction of movement). All neutrinos are anti-aligned. The reason is
> > > > > > > that the weak interaction only produces left-handed neutrinos (why? we
> > > > > > > do not know). There is no possibility to produce them (no interatction
> > > > > > > for this particles) and there is also no possibility to detect them
> > > > > > > directly (again - no interaction). The only way to detect them would
> > > > > > > be to observe a left-handed/right-handed oszillation.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yes, I understand what you mean. If neutrino has mass then there
> > > > > > exist also corresponding "right-handed neutrino". But I used
> > > > > > words "right neutrino" and "wrong neutrino" which are not
> > > > > > same matter as "left-handed neutrino" and "right-handed neutrino".
> > > > > > Words I used and uou used are possible close each other but some
> > > > > > differences exits that is why different names.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In H-M's drawings different kind of color electricity interactions
> > > > > > was described (quite mesh because I don't understand this clearly).
> > > > > > I put below some descriptions which I found from my summaries:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 0. "Mass puts different color electricity colors."
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1. "Three existing neutrinos have two colors: green and violet.
> > > > > > These colors are the two types of electricity in the contracting
> > > > > > Universe. There exist "voltage" in neutrinos that originates
> > > > > > from the contracting Universe."
> > > > > >
> > > > > Does this above 1. fit also to properties of color magnetic monopoles?
> > > > >
> > > > > If this would be true then also
> > > > > color neutrinos are same as color magnetic monopoles
> > > > > as I have earlier guessed in my old postings?
> > > > >
> > > > > (Contracting parts of the Universe would be
> > > > > for example inside event horizons of black holes?)
> > > > >
> > > > > This "voltage" which originates from contracting parts of the Universe
> > > > > could mean that these color neutrinos have also electric field
> > > > > around them when they move with some velocity v ?
> > > > >
> > > > > If this would be true then these color neutrinos interacts
> > > > > with matter also with coupling of their electric field with
> > > > > electric field inside matter through which they penetrate
> > > > > with some velocity v ?
> > > > >
> > > > > By the way I have translated (my poor english)
> > > > > finnish word "violetti" to english word "violet"
> > > > > Better translation is to translate finnish "violetti"
> > > > > to english could be "purple" ?
> > > > >
> > > > > Please take a look on my Hannu Poropudas Facebook public
> > > > > color photographs of those old H-M's old color drawings
> > > > > to see correct english word to those colors?
> > > > >
> > > > > Best Regards,
> > > > > Hannu Poropudas
> > > > I noticed that I have wrote randomly names of one
> > > > old H-M's color drawing called "Higgsin hiukkaset" (Higgs Particles in english)
> > > > and MY ERROR: I did not ask in due time H-M those correct names and which
> > > > color correspond to which particle when I wrote randomly those names
> > > > on that H-M's drawing (Z0, W+, W- and H0, H+, H-).
> > > >
> > > > I know that names Z0, W+ and W- are correct but I don't know which
> > > > color each of which corresponds.
> > > >
> > > > I think that names H0, H+, H- should
> > > > be rejected due question is certainly not MSSM (=Minimal Supersymmetrical Model)
> > > > Higgs Bosons in this case. Maybe those other three are corresponding particles
> > > > in contracting parts of the Universe ?
> > > >
> > > > Following names remain (Z0, W+, W- and "God Particle").
> > > >
> > > > I don't know that should additional "Higgs Particle" be called
> > > > "God Particle" due H-M said in due time about that "God Particle" same as
> > > > "Me" when H-M meant herself (I don't understand this at all, except if God
> > > > spoke through H-M similar way as in case of prophets in the Holy Bible) ?
> > > >
> > > > This old H-M's color drawing "Higgsin hiukkaset" is also
> > > > public in Hannu Poropudas Facebook.
> > > > Best Regards, Hannu Poropudas
> > > >
> > > > > > 2. "Wrong neutrinos": Yellow, Orange, Blue, Brown.
> > > > > > Groupings (couplings):
> > > > > > Blue, Orange, Yellow.
> > > > > > Orange, Yellow, Blue.
> > > > > > Brown, Blue, Yellow, Orange.
> > > > > > Blue, Yellow, Orange.
> > > > > > Brown, Yellow, Blue.
> > > > > > "Right neutrinos": (four big ones): Yellow, Blue, Orange, Brown..
> > > > > > (six small ones):
> > > > > > Yellow, Blue, Brown.
> > > > > > Orange, Orange, Blue.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 3. Color electricity flash of lightnings:
> > > > > > Blue, Yellow, Orange, Brown.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 4. Neutrinos have so called "magic" and so called "wonderfulness".
> > > > > > "Magic" is possibly related to dimensions in 10-dimension Universe
> > > > > > (total dimensionality of the Universe which contains our expanding
> > > > > > Universe and this present unknown contracting Universe).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 5. Exotic "space-potato particle has four different species of
> > > > > > neutrinos
> > > > > > in its structure and neutrinos are always grouped (coupled) three
> > > > > > neutrinos together. "Mirror" structure contains couples of "small
> > > > > > right neutrinos"
> > > > > > and those "hour glass forms" (pre-geomtric form ?, center of which
> > > > > > is that "small neutrino couple" od certain color electricity color
> > > > > > couples).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 6. 1,2,3,4,5,6 neutrinos groupins (one remark on the H-M's drawing).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 7. In photon of contracting Universe (one H-M's drawing):
> > > > > > Red and Blue forms a couple.
> > > > > > Green and light Blue is a couple.
> > > > > > Orange and light red is a couple.
> > > > > > Violet and yellow is a couple.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Background blue in the drawing is space blue of empty space which
> > > > > > is no color electricity.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 8. Color circle (in one H-M's drawing):
> > > > > > Yellow periphery and white center and
> > > > > > sectors: green, red, blue, light green, violet, orange.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Green and white are the best "magic colors".
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -
> > > > > >
> > > > > > (So I put here allmost all which I found from my article summaries:
> > > > > > Readme_all.txt, Readme_mid.txt and Readme_see.txt )
> > > I put here also important color electricity colors of leptons
> > > (electron, mu-lepton, tau-lepton and 4.th-lepton) from H-M's old drawing
> > >
> > > Electron:
> > > - two colors are used due final color would be bright orange color.
> > > - bright yellow and light red.
> > > -darker red color shine of color electricity spot which is in center of suction spot.
> > >
> > > mu-lepton:
> > > -two colors are used due final color would be King's cloak (="viitta" in finnish) violet (=purple, correct english term).
> > > -light blue and light red.
> > > - darker color shine of color electricity spot which is in center of suction spot.
> > >
> > > tau-lepton:
> > > -one color.
> > > -green.
> > > -darker green color shine of color electricity spot which is in center of suction spot.
> > >
> > > 4.th-lepton:
> > > -light brown and gray-brown (this gray-brown color is not suction),
> > > -red-brown (this is not suction and H-M's drawing is looked from above),
> > > - dent (= "lommo" in finnish and H-M's drawing is looked from above),
> > > -4.th-lepton is different than other three leptons above,
> > > but this 4.th-lepton has not much significance for physics.
> > >
> > > It is my opinion that we should try to correct our present standard model
> > > of particle physics with these H-M's drawings as "axioms of astrophysics" ?
> > >
> > > These and other H-M's old drawings are public in my Hannu Poropudas Facebook.
> > >
> > > Best Regards,
> > >
> > > Hannu Poropudas,
> > > Kolamäentie 9E, 90900 Kiiminki / Oulu, Finland.
> > I forget to say that in H-M's old drawing about black hole there is also drawn this
> > 4.th neutrino, green color electricity color and its shape is
> > strange 4-polygon with four cornes. This color eclectrity 4-polygon was drawn near the tau-neutrino.
> >
> > I forget also mention about above text of mine four leptons that
> > those suction spots which are drawn on the surface above described leptons
> > are interpreted by me such that colorless electric field (our familiar E-field?) originates from them.
> > And from suction spot starts to be formed towards inside of the surface
> > and finally to the center of the surface tornado like
> > color electricity tornado (really form of cone).
> > I have interpreted that suction spot is only one side due the spin (=1/2) of
> > corresponding color electricity neutrino which H-M called long time ago
> > the soul of corresponding lepton.
> >
> > This copy below is due that I think that now it could be possible
> > to correct our present standard model of physics?
> >
> > I put here also in addition important color electricity colors of
> > H-M's old drawings of four quarks and also color electricity colors of proton/neutron:
> >
> > First those four quarks (H-M's old drawing they are 8-polygons,
> > which are in place of color electricity black hole's singularity):
> >
> > 1. -green (and no scratches = "naarmuja" in finnish)
> > 2. -red (two blue scrathes which intersects each others,
> > when one 8/8-single cut diamond has scrathed this quark in its born process).
> > 3. -violet (correct english term for my finnish term violet is purple,
> > two red scrathes which do not intersect each others,
> > two 8/8-single cut diamonds have scrathed this quark in its born process)
> > 4. -yellow (no scrathes).
> >
> > Scrathes are born due stratchings of 8/8-single cut diamods (which I have later
> > called creation stones of the Universe. In H-M's drawing these are two different
> > types of these 8/8-single cut diamonds.)
> >
> > Background color electricity color is not drawn although it should also be there.
> >
> > Background color electricity color is light blue (= empty space's color electricity color
> > which is not color ecltricity.)
> >
> > Proton / Neutron H-M's old drawing:
> >
> > Color cicle is (this is half proton and half neutron for both):
> > 1. -violet (correct english term should be purple), (I have interpreted this weak interaction color),
> > 2. -dark green, (I have interpreted this weak interaction color),
> > 3. - light red, (I have interpreted this strong interaction color),
> > 4. -yellow, (I have interpreted this strong interaction color),
> > 5. -light blue, (I have interpreted this strong interaction color).
> >
> > Proton/Neutron from other side looked:
> >
> > 1. violet (correct english term should be purple) light periphery (="valokehä" in finnish) circle
> > with violet spot in center and center of this spot is small dark violet spot,
> > 2. green light periphery circle
> > with green spot in center and center of this spot is small dark violet spot,
> > 3. light red light periphery circle
> > with light red spot in center and center of this spot is small dark violet spot,
> > 4. light red light periphery circle (check color from H-M's drawing, if light blue is correct?)
> > with light blue spot in center and center of this spot is small dark violet spot,
> > 5. yellow light periphery circle
> > with yellow spot in center and center of this spot is small dark violet spot.
> >
> > I have interpreted those color electricity periphery circles as color electricity gluons
> > (couples of color electricity neutrinos)?
> >
> > Background color is space's dark blue (stars are mark of space's color)..
> >
> > Proton is such that one of those five quarks is black (or space's color dark blue?)
> > due mass of proton has changed color electricity color to no color electricity.
> > Combination of four color electricity colors are stable.
> >
> > Neutron is such that as H-M's old explanation said " one day neutron has those five color electricity colors
> > and an second day it has this color electricity structure of proton.
> >
> > So proton and neutron are same particle's two different states as I have interpreted it.
> >
> > Please CHECK those colors from photographs of those original H-M's drawings
> > which are public on my Hannu Poropudas Facebook
> > due I copied these here from my memory pages.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Hannu Poropudas
> > Kolamäentie 9E,
> > 90900 Kiiminki / Oulu
> > Finland.
> I put here copies of two old my postings (1994 and 1995) from sci.physics..particle
> due that I think that NOW should be time to think what kind of
> mathematics could be tried in case of H-M's old drawings?
>
> I think that this below Dirac's Nonlinear Equation could be worth to try to
> leptons (electron, mu-lepton, tau-lepton).
>
> Neutrinos (electron-neutrino, mu-lepton neutrino,
> tau-lepton neutrino) have their rest mass = 0, so at least u = 0 in below equation.
> Maybe some additional modifications is still needed in case of neutrinos ?
>
> Some open questions about representation conventions must also be solved first.
> Best Regards, Hannu Poropudas, Kolamäentie 9E, 90900 Kiiminki / Oulu, Finland.
> ----- TWO COPIES BELOW 1. and 2. ------------
> 1.
> Dirac's Nonlinear Equation
> 1 katselukerta
> Tilaa
> Käyttäjän Hannu Poropudas profiilikuva
> Hannu Poropudas
> 30.1.1994 klo 18.55.33
> vastaanottaja
>
> I have here Dirac's Nonlinear Equation:
>
>
> k^a (D/Dx^a - C_a)P - l^2 (P_bar k k^b P) k k_b P - uP = 0
>
> where l^2 = 3pi G_F /(h_bar c),
> G_F is Weak interaction's Fermi constant 1.43582*10^-62 Jm^3 (SI-units)
> u = m_0 c /h_bar, P is Dirac's four component spinor wave function,
> a,b = 0,1,2,3.
> C_a is spinor connection coefficients,
> D is ordinary partial derivative.
> k^a = k^0,k^1,k^2,k^3 are Dirac's matrices which depend on space
> time.
>
> Question is now: How would you define k_5 (in Russian way), if
> k = i k_5, where i = (-1)^1/2 and det(g_ij) is determinant of
> metric basic tensor.?
>
> I have one reference: Encyclopedia of Mathematics, vol. 3,
> Kluver Academic Publishers , 1989. This is english translation
> from: Soviet Mathematical Encyclopaedia, Soviet Encyclopaedia
> Publishing House (1977 - 1985), Parts 1-5 + some other later
> parts.
>
>
> Best Regards,
> Hannu Poropudas
> hapo...@freenet.hut.fi
>
> "Due to the neutrino cages all souls are divided only to two groups.
> Those which can go through them and those which remain in them to
> wait fire expansion stopping of the visible Universe."
>
> ----------------------------------
> 2.
>
> Käyttäjän Hannu Poropudas profiilikuva
> Hannu Poropudas
> lukematon,
> 21.7.1995 klo 10.00.00
> vastaanottaja
>
> I refer here to my posting 'Dirac's Nonlinear Equation',
> <2igoq5$t...@freenet.hut.fi>, which was dated 30 Jan 1994:
>
> I have then a little problem with Russian units and
> I did not got any help then, now I would like to repeat
> the question:
>
> k^a (D/Dx^a - C_a)P - l^2 (P* kk^b P) kk_b P - uP = 0,
>
> where I have modified l^2 constant to be
>
> l^2 = 3pi G_F /(h_bar c), where G_F is weak interaction
> Fermi constant = 1.43582 *10^-62 Jm^3 (in SI-units).
>
> u = m_0 c/h_bar,
>
> h_bar = h/(2pi), h = Planck's constant, pi = 3.14159...,
>
> m_0 is the rest mass of the particle (spin=h_bar/2).
>
> P = Dirac's four component spinor wave function,
>
> a,b = 0,1,2,3,
>
> C_a = Spinor connection coefficients,
>
> D is ordinary partial derivative,
>
> k^a = k^0, k^1, k^2, k^3 are Dirac's matrices, which
> depend on space and time.
>
> (g_ij) is the determinant of metric basic tensor
> (Russian way uses here different signature in flat space-time
> case. In this case g_ij depends on space and time.)
>
> My problem is how to define k = ik_5 properly in
> Russian units or all above in most understandable and
> most easiest SI-units.?
>
> REFERENCE:
>
> Encyclopedia of Mathematics, 1989.
> Vol.3, Cluver Academic Publishers.
> (Transl. Soviet Mathematical Encyclopaedia,
> Soviet Encyclopaedia Publishing House, 1977-1985-?,
> Parts 1-10.)
>
> ---
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Hannu Poropudas.
>
> "It's Not What You Know That Matters
> ... It's Knowing What You Don't."
> -----------------------------------------------

On Sunday, March 5, 2023 at 11:03:39 PM UTC-8, Hannu Poropudas wrote:
> perjantai 3. maaliskuuta 2023 klo 8.49.22 UTC+2 Chris M. Thomasson kirjoitti:
> > On 1/16/2023 2:09 AM, Hannu Poropudas wrote:
> > > If photon rest mass is zero then rest masses of all types of neutrinos is zero?
> > >
> > > In one H-M's old drawing about photon (dark light photon?)
> > > of contracting part of the Universe, this photon (dark light photon?)
> > > is such that it consists only color right-neutrinos with
> > > color-small-right-neutrinos.
> > >
> > > If photon (light photon) of expanding part of the Universe would be similar
> > > but consisting only color-wrong-neutrinos, then all these color-wrong-neutrinos
> > > would have zero rest mass ?
> > >
> > > This would mean that also rest mass differences of all color-wrong-neutrinos
> > > would be also zero ?
> > >
> > > If true, this would mean also that no neutrino oscillation (
> > > color-wrong-neutrino) would exist?
> > >
> > >
> > > This old H-M's drawing is public in Hannu Poropudas Facebook page.
> > >
> > > I would like to call all these H-M's old drawings "axioms of astrophysics".
> >
> > Is there such thing as a system that is not in motion?
> >
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-point_energy
> I used words "axioms of astrophysics" which one should be thinking what this means ?
>
> How Heisenberg's uncertainty principle is accounted in the modified
> (only by constant which I gave, this was my guess of needed mathematics)
> nonlinear Dirac's equation?
>
> I found one interesting discussion (based our present known physics/cosmology?)
> from the year 2022 about your question ?
>
> https://www.quora.com/Are-there-things-in-the-universe-that-are-not-in-motion-If-so-which-ones
>
> Hannu

I think highly of Hannu Poropudas and think he's pretty great.

Here then I posit: what if neutrinos don't have rest mass at all?
After all, they're only flux, with only "flux energy, equivalent to mass".

Then it might make sense that their "rest mass" is zero, only in the
sense that it's only at the interface of massy bodies at rest where
the energy would exchange at all.

This is about where there's only photons and photinos and gravitons and
gravitinos, with respect to neutrons and neutrinos, where the atom is the
real graviton, because fall gravity unifies field theory.

On Thursday, March 9, 2023 at 9:16:05 AM UTC-8, Ross Finlayson wrote:
> On Sunday, March 5, 2023 at 11:03:39 PM UTC-8, Hannu Poropudas wrote:
> > perjantai 3. maaliskuuta 2023 klo 8.49.22 UTC+2 Chris M. Thomasson kirjoitti:
> > > On 1/16/2023 2:09 AM, Hannu Poropudas wrote:
> > > > If photon rest mass is zero then rest masses of all types of neutrinos is zero?
> > > >
> > > > In one H-M's old drawing about photon (dark light photon?)
> > > > of contracting part of the Universe, this photon (dark light photon?)
> > > > is such that it consists only color right-neutrinos with
> > > > color-small-right-neutrinos.
> > > >
> > > > If photon (light photon) of expanding part of the Universe would be similar
> > > > but consisting only color-wrong-neutrinos, then all these color-wrong-neutrinos
> > > > would have zero rest mass ?
> > > >
> > > > This would mean that also rest mass differences of all color-wrong-neutrinos
> > > > would be also zero ?
> > > >
> > > > If true, this would mean also that no neutrino oscillation (
> > > > color-wrong-neutrino) would exist?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > This old H-M's drawing is public in Hannu Poropudas Facebook page.
> > > >
> > > > I would like to call all these H-M's old drawings "axioms of astrophysics".
> > >
> > > Is there such thing as a system that is not in motion?
> > >
> > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-point_energy
> > I used words "axioms of astrophysics" which one should be thinking what this means ?
> >
> > How Heisenberg's uncertainty principle is accounted in the modified
> > (only by constant which I gave, this was my guess of needed mathematics)
> > nonlinear Dirac's equation?
> >
> > I found one interesting discussion (based our present known physics/cosmology?)
> > from the year 2022 about your question ?
> >
> > https://www.quora.com/Are-there-things-in-the-universe-that-are-not-in-motion-If-so-which-ones
> >
> > Hannu
> I think highly of Hannu Poropudas and think he's pretty great.
>
> Here then I posit: what if neutrinos don't have rest mass at all?
> After all, they're only flux, with only "flux energy, equivalent to mass"..
>
> Then it might make sense that their "rest mass" is zero, only in the
> sense that it's only at the interface of massy bodies at rest where
> the energy would exchange at all.
>
> This is about where there's only photons and photinos and gravitons and
> gravitinos, with respect to neutrons and neutrinos, where the atom is the
> real graviton, because fall gravity unifies field theory.

Light absorbed... inside the atom it has mass by its definition.
What is the fundamental speed of a neutrino?
Near light speed energy it always manifests mass.
If the neutrino moves below light speed it has
mass.

torstai 9. maaliskuuta 2023 klo 16.19.46 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> maanantai 27. helmikuuta 2023 klo 11.44.15 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > keskiviikko 22. helmikuuta 2023 klo 12.17.05 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > maanantai 20. helmikuuta 2023 klo 12.36.00 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > > lauantai 21. tammikuuta 2023 klo 10.57.48 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > > > perjantai 20. tammikuuta 2023 klo 9.25.28 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > > > > tiistai 17. tammikuuta 2023 klo 11.32.43 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > > > > > tiistai 17. tammikuuta 2023 klo 10.27.35 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > > > > > > maanantai 16. tammikuuta 2023 klo 19.42.24 UTC+2 Tom Roberts kirjoitti:
> > > > > > > > > On 1/16/23 4:09 AM, Hannu Poropudas wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > If photon rest mass is zero then rest masses of all types of
> > > > > > > > > > neutrinos is zero?
> > > > > > > > > No.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Neutrinos are observed to oscillate -- they change flavor as they
> > > > > > > > > propagate over distance. This is modeled as flavor eigenstates being
> > > > > > > > > different from mass eigenstates. That directly implies that at least two
> > > > > > > > > neutrino mass eigenstates (out of three) have nonzero mass; it is likely
> > > > > > > > > that all three have nonzero mass. Flavor eigenstates do not have a
> > > > > > > > > definite mass. Note that flavor eigenstates appear in the Lagrangian and
> > > > > > > > > are how interactions occur, while mass eigenstates describe how they
> > > > > > > > > propagate over distance.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Tom Roberts
> > > > > > > > 1. Deficit in the flux of solar neutrinos observed - YES.
> > > > > > > > 2. Deficit in the flux of muon neutrinos in case of atmospheric neutrinos observed - YES.
> > > > > > > > 3. Deficit in the flux of reactor electron anti-neutrinos observed - YES.
> > > > > > > > 4. Deficit in the flux of particle accelerator beam muon neutrinos observed - YES.
> > > > > > > > 5. Deficit in the flux of particle accelerator beam of tau neutrinos observed - YES.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The claim neutrinos change flavor - NO.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > If I remember right
> > > > > > > > (correctness of this my memory picture this should be checked from my old postings)
> > > > > > > > that in old H-M's drawing the space-potato particle those neutrinos are always grouped three
> > > > > > > > different color neutrinos together ? I don't know what this could mean ?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > New explanations are needed to explain 1.- 4. above ?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I don't understand what is mass eigenstate/s of neutrino/s ?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Could this be something similar that photon has quantum mechanical mass
> > > > > > > > m = h*v/c^2, but this is not rest mass of photon which is zero
> > > > > > > > (special relativity says that rest mass of photon is m0 = 0 )?
> > > > > > > > (h = Plack's constant, v = frequency of light, c = speed of light in vacuum)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hannu
> > > > > > > I found one old posting of mine from sci.physics Google Group..
> > > > > > > Here seems to be something about groupings of color wrong neutrinos
> > > > > > > and color right neutrinos and color small right neutrinos.
> > > > > > > I don't understand what these color groupings mean?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I put COPY of it here below
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Reference:
> > > > > > > Hannu Poropudas, 2003.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Re: About Solar Neutrino Problem
> > > > > > > sci.physics, Google Groups, Oct 3, 2003, 11:23:15 AM
> > > > > > > hannu.p...@osakk.fi's profile photo
> > > > > > > hannu.p...@osakk.fi
> > > > > > > unread,
> > > > > > > Oct 3, 2003, 11:23:15 AM
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > basti...@gmx.net (Bastian) wrote in message news:<44d6926c.03100...@posting.google.com>...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Seems to me you mix up a couple of things. Here an explanation:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 1) Yes there is an neutrino flux. The fusion processes in the sun
> > > > > > > > generate this flux. Without the fusion processes the sun would
> > > > > > > > collaps. BUT this neutrino flux
> > > > > > > > is emitted isotropically - and of course there is nothing like a
> > > > > > > > "center of the space".
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 2) There are three species of neutrinos (very well known from the
> > > > > > > > measurement of the Z^0 -resonance at CERN). There is a small unlikely
> > > > > > > > possibility for a 4th generation of very heavy neutrinos (nu-mass >
> > > > > > > > Z^0-mass).
> > > > > > > > All neutrinos are left-handed. What does it mean? Neutrinos have spin
> > > > > > > > (spin 1/2). For massless particles the spin could be aligned or
> > > > > > > > anti-aligned with the direction of the movement (actually one would
> > > > > > > > rather speak about helicity a which is the spin projection into the
> > > > > > > > direction of movement). All neutrinos are anti-aligned. The reason is
> > > > > > > > that the weak interaction only produces left-handed neutrinos (why? we
> > > > > > > > do not know). There is no possibility to produce them (no interatction
> > > > > > > > for this particles) and there is also no possibility to detect them
> > > > > > > > directly (again - no interaction). The only way to detect them would
> > > > > > > > be to observe a left-handed/right-handed oszillation.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Yes, I understand what you mean. If neutrino has mass then there
> > > > > > > exist also corresponding "right-handed neutrino". But I used
> > > > > > > words "right neutrino" and "wrong neutrino" which are not
> > > > > > > same matter as "left-handed neutrino" and "right-handed neutrino".
> > > > > > > Words I used and uou used are possible close each other but some
> > > > > > > differences exits that is why different names.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > In H-M's drawings different kind of color electricity interactions
> > > > > > > was described (quite mesh because I don't understand this clearly).
> > > > > > > I put below some descriptions which I found from my summaries:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 0. "Mass puts different color electricity colors."
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 1. "Three existing neutrinos have two colors: green and violet.
> > > > > > > These colors are the two types of electricity in the contracting
> > > > > > > Universe. There exist "voltage" in neutrinos that originates
> > > > > > > from the contracting Universe."
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > Does this above 1. fit also to properties of color magnetic monopoles?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If this would be true then also
> > > > > > color neutrinos are same as color magnetic monopoles
> > > > > > as I have earlier guessed in my old postings?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > (Contracting parts of the Universe would be
> > > > > > for example inside event horizons of black holes?)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This "voltage" which originates from contracting parts of the Universe
> > > > > > could mean that these color neutrinos have also electric field
> > > > > > around them when they move with some velocity v ?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If this would be true then these color neutrinos interacts
> > > > > > with matter also with coupling of their electric field with
> > > > > > electric field inside matter through which they penetrate
> > > > > > with some velocity v ?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > By the way I have translated (my poor english)
> > > > > > finnish word "violetti" to english word "violet"
> > > > > > Better translation is to translate finnish "violetti"
> > > > > > to english could be "purple" ?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Please take a look on my Hannu Poropudas Facebook public
> > > > > > color photographs of those old H-M's old color drawings
> > > > > > to see correct english word to those colors?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best Regards,
> > > > > > Hannu Poropudas
> > > > > I noticed that I have wrote randomly names of one
> > > > > old H-M's color drawing called "Higgsin hiukkaset" (Higgs Particles in english)
> > > > > and MY ERROR: I did not ask in due time H-M those correct names and which
> > > > > color correspond to which particle when I wrote randomly those names
> > > > > on that H-M's drawing (Z0, W+, W- and H0, H+, H-).
> > > > >
> > > > > I know that names Z0, W+ and W- are correct but I don't know which
> > > > > color each of which corresponds.
> > > > >
> > > > > I think that names H0, H+, H- should
> > > > > be rejected due question is certainly not MSSM (=Minimal Supersymmetrical Model)
> > > > > Higgs Bosons in this case. Maybe those other three are corresponding particles
> > > > > in contracting parts of the Universe ?
> > > > >
> > > > > Following names remain (Z0, W+, W- and "God Particle").
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't know that should additional "Higgs Particle" be called
> > > > > "God Particle" due H-M said in due time about that "God Particle" same as
> > > > > "Me" when H-M meant herself (I don't understand this at all, except if God
> > > > > spoke through H-M similar way as in case of prophets in the Holy Bible) ?
> > > > >
> > > > > This old H-M's color drawing "Higgsin hiukkaset" is also
> > > > > public in Hannu Poropudas Facebook.
> > > > > Best Regards, Hannu Poropudas
> > > > >
> > > > > > > 2. "Wrong neutrinos": Yellow, Orange, Blue, Brown.
> > > > > > > Groupings (couplings):
> > > > > > > Blue, Orange, Yellow.
> > > > > > > Orange, Yellow, Blue.
> > > > > > > Brown, Blue, Yellow, Orange.
> > > > > > > Blue, Yellow, Orange.
> > > > > > > Brown, Yellow, Blue.
> > > > > > > "Right neutrinos": (four big ones): Yellow, Blue, Orange, Brown.
> > > > > > > (six small ones):
> > > > > > > Yellow, Blue, Brown.
> > > > > > > Orange, Orange, Blue.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 3. Color electricity flash of lightnings:
> > > > > > > Blue, Yellow, Orange, Brown.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 4. Neutrinos have so called "magic" and so called "wonderfulness".
> > > > > > > "Magic" is possibly related to dimensions in 10-dimension Universe
> > > > > > > (total dimensionality of the Universe which contains our expanding
> > > > > > > Universe and this present unknown contracting Universe).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 5. Exotic "space-potato particle has four different species of
> > > > > > > neutrinos
> > > > > > > in its structure and neutrinos are always grouped (coupled) three
> > > > > > > neutrinos together. "Mirror" structure contains couples of "small
> > > > > > > right neutrinos"
> > > > > > > and those "hour glass forms" (pre-geomtric form ?, center of which
> > > > > > > is that "small neutrino couple" od certain color electricity color
> > > > > > > couples).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 6. 1,2,3,4,5,6 neutrinos groupins (one remark on the H-M's drawing).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 7. In photon of contracting Universe (one H-M's drawing):
> > > > > > > Red and Blue forms a couple.
> > > > > > > Green and light Blue is a couple.
> > > > > > > Orange and light red is a couple.
> > > > > > > Violet and yellow is a couple.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Background blue in the drawing is space blue of empty space which
> > > > > > > is no color electricity.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 8. Color circle (in one H-M's drawing):
> > > > > > > Yellow periphery and white center and
> > > > > > > sectors: green, red, blue, light green, violet, orange.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Green and white are the best "magic colors".
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > (So I put here allmost all which I found from my article summaries:
> > > > > > > Readme_all.txt, Readme_mid.txt and Readme_see.txt )
> > > > I put here also important color electricity colors of leptons
> > > > (electron, mu-lepton, tau-lepton and 4.th-lepton) from H-M's old drawing
> > > >
> > > > Electron:
> > > > - two colors are used due final color would be bright orange color.
> > > > - bright yellow and light red.
> > > > -darker red color shine of color electricity spot which is in center of suction spot.
> > > >
> > > > mu-lepton:
> > > > -two colors are used due final color would be King's cloak (="viitta" in finnish) violet (=purple, correct english term).
> > > > -light blue and light red.
> > > > - darker color shine of color electricity spot which is in center of suction spot.
> > > >
> > > > tau-lepton:
> > > > -one color.
> > > > -green.
> > > > -darker green color shine of color electricity spot which is in center of suction spot.
> > > >
> > > > 4.th-lepton:
> > > > -light brown and gray-brown (this gray-brown color is not suction),
> > > > -red-brown (this is not suction and H-M's drawing is looked from above),
> > > > - dent (= "lommo" in finnish and H-M's drawing is looked from above),
> > > > -4.th-lepton is different than other three leptons above,
> > > > but this 4.th-lepton has not much significance for physics.
> > > >
> > > > It is my opinion that we should try to correct our present standard model
> > > > of particle physics with these H-M's drawings as "axioms of astrophysics" ?
> > > >
> > > > These and other H-M's old drawings are public in my Hannu Poropudas Facebook.
> > > >
> > > > Best Regards,
> > > >
> > > > Hannu Poropudas,
> > > > Kolamäentie 9E, 90900 Kiiminki / Oulu, Finland.
> > > I forget to say that in H-M's old drawing about black hole there is also drawn this
> > > 4.th neutrino, green color electricity color and its shape is
> > > strange 4-polygon with four cornes. This color eclectrity 4-polygon was drawn near the tau-neutrino.
> > >
> > > I forget also mention about above text of mine four leptons that
> > > those suction spots which are drawn on the surface above described leptons
> > > are interpreted by me such that colorless electric field (our familiar E-field?) originates from them.
> > > And from suction spot starts to be formed towards inside of the surface
> > > and finally to the center of the surface tornado like
> > > color electricity tornado (really form of cone).
> > > I have interpreted that suction spot is only one side due the spin (=1/2) of
> > > corresponding color electricity neutrino which H-M called long time ago
> > > the soul of corresponding lepton.
> > >
> > > This copy below is due that I think that now it could be possible
> > > to correct our present standard model of physics?
> > >
> > > I put here also in addition important color electricity colors of
> > > H-M's old drawings of four quarks and also color electricity colors of proton/neutron:
> > >
> > > First those four quarks (H-M's old drawing they are 8-polygons,
> > > which are in place of color electricity black hole's singularity):
> > >
> > > 1. -green (and no scratches = "naarmuja" in finnish)
> > > 2. -red (two blue scrathes which intersects each others,
> > > when one 8/8-single cut diamond has scrathed this quark in its born process).
> > > 3. -violet (correct english term for my finnish term violet is purple,
> > > two red scrathes which do not intersect each others,
> > > two 8/8-single cut diamonds have scrathed this quark in its born process)
> > > 4. -yellow (no scrathes).
> > >
> > > Scrathes are born due stratchings of 8/8-single cut diamods (which I have later
> > > called creation stones of the Universe. In H-M's drawing these are two different
> > > types of these 8/8-single cut diamonds.)
> > >
> > > Background color electricity color is not drawn although it should also be there.
> > >
> > > Background color electricity color is light blue (= empty space's color electricity color
> > > which is not color ecltricity.)
> > >
> > > Proton / Neutron H-M's old drawing:
> > >
> > > Color cicle is (this is half proton and half neutron for both):
> > > 1. -violet (correct english term should be purple), (I have interpreted this weak interaction color),
> > > 2. -dark green, (I have interpreted this weak interaction color),
> > > 3. - light red, (I have interpreted this strong interaction color),
> > > 4. -yellow, (I have interpreted this strong interaction color),
> > > 5. -light blue, (I have interpreted this strong interaction color).
> > >
> > > Proton/Neutron from other side looked:
> > >
> > > 1. violet (correct english term should be purple) light periphery (="valokehä" in finnish) circle
> > > with violet spot in center and center of this spot is small dark violet spot,
> > > 2. green light periphery circle
> > > with green spot in center and center of this spot is small dark violet spot,
> > > 3. light red light periphery circle
> > > with light red spot in center and center of this spot is small dark violet spot,
> > > 4. light red light periphery circle (check color from H-M's drawing, if light blue is correct?)
> > > with light blue spot in center and center of this spot is small dark violet spot,
> > > 5. yellow light periphery circle
> > > with yellow spot in center and center of this spot is small dark violet spot.
> > >
> > > I have interpreted those color electricity periphery circles as color electricity gluons
> > > (couples of color electricity neutrinos)?
> > >
> > > Background color is space's dark blue (stars are mark of space's color).
> > >
> > > Proton is such that one of those five quarks is black (or space's color dark blue?)
> > > due mass of proton has changed color electricity color to no color electricity.
> > > Combination of four color electricity colors are stable.
> > >
> > > Neutron is such that as H-M's old explanation said " one day neutron has those five color electricity colors
> > > and an second day it has this color electricity structure of proton.
> > >
> > > So proton and neutron are same particle's two different states as I have interpreted it.
> > >
> > > Please CHECK those colors from photographs of those original H-M's drawings
> > > which are public on my Hannu Poropudas Facebook
> > > due I copied these here from my memory pages.
> > >
> > > Best Regards,
> > > Hannu Poropudas
> > > Kolamäentie 9E,
> > > 90900 Kiiminki / Oulu
> > > Finland.
> > I put here copies of two old my postings (1994 and 1995) from sci.physics.particle
> > due that I think that NOW should be time to think what kind of
> > mathematics could be tried in case of H-M's old drawings?
> >
> > I think that this below Dirac's Nonlinear Equation could be worth to try to
> > leptons (electron, mu-lepton, tau-lepton).
> >
> > Neutrinos (electron-neutrino, mu-lepton neutrino,
> > tau-lepton neutrino) have their rest mass = 0, so at least u = 0 in below equation.
> > Maybe some additional modifications is still needed in case of neutrinos ?
> >
> > Some open questions about representation conventions must also be solved first.
> > Best Regards, Hannu Poropudas, Kolamäentie 9E, 90900 Kiiminki / Oulu, Finland.
> > ----- TWO COPIES BELOW 1. and 2. ------------
> > 1.
> > Dirac's Nonlinear Equation
> > 1 katselukerta
> > Tilaa
> > Käyttäjän Hannu Poropudas profiilikuva
> > Hannu Poropudas
> > 30.1.1994 klo 18.55.33
> > vastaanottaja
> >
> > I have here Dirac's Nonlinear Equation:
> >
> >
> > k^a (D/Dx^a - C_a)P - l^2 (P_bar k k^b P) k k_b P - uP = 0
> >
> > where l^2 = 3pi G_F /(h_bar c),
> > G_F is Weak interaction's Fermi constant 1.43582*10^-62 Jm^3 (SI-units)
> > u = m_0 c /h_bar, P is Dirac's four component spinor wave function,
> > a,b = 0,1,2,3.
> > C_a is spinor connection coefficients,
> > D is ordinary partial derivative.
> > k^a = k^0,k^1,k^2,k^3 are Dirac's matrices which depend on space
> > time.
> >
> > Question is now: How would you define k_5 (in Russian way), if
> > k = i k_5, where i = (-1)^1/2 and det(g_ij) is determinant of
> > metric basic tensor.?
> >
> > I have one reference: Encyclopedia of Mathematics, vol. 3,
> > Kluver Academic Publishers , 1989. This is english translation
> > from: Soviet Mathematical Encyclopaedia, Soviet Encyclopaedia
> > Publishing House (1977 - 1985), Parts 1-5 + some other later
> > parts.
> >
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Hannu Poropudas
> > hapo...@freenet.hut.fi
> >
> > "Due to the neutrino cages all souls are divided only to two groups.
> > Those which can go through them and those which remain in them to
> > wait fire expansion stopping of the visible Universe."
> >
> > ----------------------------------
> > 2.
> >
> > Käyttäjän Hannu Poropudas profiilikuva
> > Hannu Poropudas
> > lukematon,
> > 21.7.1995 klo 10.00.00
> > vastaanottaja
> >
> > I refer here to my posting 'Dirac's Nonlinear Equation',
> > <2igoq5$t...@freenet.hut.fi>, which was dated 30 Jan 1994:
> >
> > I have then a little problem with Russian units and
> > I did not got any help then, now I would like to repeat
> > the question:
> >
> > k^a (D/Dx^a - C_a)P - l^2 (P* kk^b P) kk_b P - uP = 0,
> >
> > where I have modified l^2 constant to be
> >
> > l^2 = 3pi G_F /(h_bar c), where G_F is weak interaction
> > Fermi constant = 1.43582 *10^-62 Jm^3 (in SI-units).
> >
> > u = m_0 c/h_bar,
> >
> > h_bar = h/(2pi), h = Planck's constant, pi = 3.14159...,
> >
> > m_0 is the rest mass of the particle (spin=h_bar/2).
> >
> > P = Dirac's four component spinor wave function,
> >
> > a,b = 0,1,2,3,
> >
> > C_a = Spinor connection coefficients,
> >
> > D is ordinary partial derivative,
> >
> > k^a = k^0, k^1, k^2, k^3 are Dirac's matrices, which
> > depend on space and time.
> >
> > (g_ij) is the determinant of metric basic tensor
> > (Russian way uses here different signature in flat space-time
> > case. In this case g_ij depends on space and time.)
> >
> > My problem is how to define k = ik_5 properly in
> > Russian units or all above in most understandable and
> > most easiest SI-units.?
> >
> > REFERENCE:
> >
> > Encyclopedia of Mathematics, 1989.
> > Vol.3, Cluver Academic Publishers.
> > (Transl. Soviet Mathematical Encyclopaedia,
> > Soviet Encyclopaedia Publishing House, 1977-1985-?,
> > Parts 1-10.)
> >
> > ---
> >
> >
> > Best Regards,
> >
> > Hannu Poropudas.
> >
> > "It's Not What You Know That Matters
> > ... It's Knowing What You Don't."
> > -----------------------------------------------
>
> CORRECTION
>
> P_bar or P* are wrong markings of complex conjugate of P
> in above old postings of mine.
>
> -----
> REMARK (important):
>
> I found one interesting article about approximate exact colorless solution
> which used characterictic dimensions l* for strong gravity hypothesis
> l* = (8*Pi*h_bar*G_s/c^3)^(1/2) = approximately 10^(-13) cm, (1.11).
> (l* = l and e=+1 in later text of (Mielke E W 1981) )
>
> (In my old postings this would be replaced by l* = l, where
>
> l^2 = 3pi G_F /(h_bar c),
>
> G_F is Weak interaction's Fermi constant 1.43582*10^-62 Jm^3 (SI-units).
> And same Mielke E W radial solution would be used but now with different l.
>
> And now instead of quarks there are colorless leptons in question in this radial
> approximate exact solution.
> And colorless neutrinos case is modified perhaps little differently?)
>
> (Definition of Phi, which was in my old postings called as P is (1.3 on page 2).)
> (Definitions of Mielke are (1.1)-(1.3) and (2.1) - (2.9))
>
> Melke (Mielke E W 1981) used little different definitions for naming and
> different notations than what I used in those above old postings of mine.
>
> So these definitions and markings of (Mielke E W 1981) are used now
> and you have to look all equations reference mentioned in this preprint article,
> which has Mielke's hand written equations)
>
> Approximation was explained on pages 6 - 7 (I put explanation of this approximation below copy "...").
> in Lagrangian densitty (2.1) on page 5 and page 6 - 7
>
> "According to well-known relations between scalar products of bilinear forms
> containing identical spinors the self-interaction in (2.1), which is of the axial-vector-type,
> may be replaced by a scalar-minus-a-pseudoscalar-type self-coupling, i.e.,
> (2.10) equations on page 6."
>
> (Approximation was such that this last pseudo-scalar term was dopped away..)
>
> "Therefore it is justified to a certain extent to consider instead of (1.2) on page 2"
>
> (Which I have called on my old postings nonlinear Dirac's equation.)
>
> "Therefore it is justified to certain extent to consider instead of (1.2) on page 2 the
> nonlinear Dirac equation (2.11) on page 6"
>
> (radial part of which (2.11) is solved exactly in (Mieleke E W 1981) article,
> pp. 7 - 24, please take a look these pages.
> Unfortunately no plotted figures of these solutions was included.)
>
> " having an algebraically simplified self-interaction.
> (The inclusion of the pseudoscalar term would lead to a more intricate model.)"
>
> REFERENCE :
> Mielke Eckehard W. 1981.
> Toward exact solutions of the nonlinear Heisenberg-Pauli-Weyl spinor equation.
> Journal of Mathematical Physics, Vol. 22, 2034 (1981).
> (This article is also readable from the free preprint pdf:
> https://stramings.ictp.it/preprints/P/80/045.pdf
> IC/80/45, Internal Report (Limited distribution), 12 double pages, pp. 1-24.)
>
> Sorry that I was not able to write equations anymore here.
>
> Best Regards, Hannu Poropudas, Kolamäentie 9E, 90900 Kiiminki / Oulu, Finland.

perjantai 10. maaliskuuta 2023 klo 8.15.23 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> torstai 9. maaliskuuta 2023 klo 16.19.46 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > maanantai 27. helmikuuta 2023 klo 11.44.15 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > keskiviikko 22. helmikuuta 2023 klo 12.17.05 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > > maanantai 20. helmikuuta 2023 klo 12.36.00 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > > > lauantai 21. tammikuuta 2023 klo 10.57.48 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > > > > perjantai 20. tammikuuta 2023 klo 9.25.28 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > > > > > tiistai 17. tammikuuta 2023 klo 11.32.43 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > > > > > > tiistai 17. tammikuuta 2023 klo 10.27.35 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > > > > > > > maanantai 16. tammikuuta 2023 klo 19.42.24 UTC+2 Tom Roberts kirjoitti:
> > > > > > > > > > On 1/16/23 4:09 AM, Hannu Poropudas wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > If photon rest mass is zero then rest masses of all types of
> > > > > > > > > > > neutrinos is zero?
> > > > > > > > > > No.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Neutrinos are observed to oscillate -- they change flavor as they
> > > > > > > > > > propagate over distance. This is modeled as flavor eigenstates being
> > > > > > > > > > different from mass eigenstates. That directly implies that at least two
> > > > > > > > > > neutrino mass eigenstates (out of three) have nonzero mass; it is likely
> > > > > > > > > > that all three have nonzero mass. Flavor eigenstates do not have a
> > > > > > > > > > definite mass. Note that flavor eigenstates appear in the Lagrangian and
> > > > > > > > > > are how interactions occur, while mass eigenstates describe how they
> > > > > > > > > > propagate over distance.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Tom Roberts
> > > > > > > > > 1. Deficit in the flux of solar neutrinos observed - YES.
> > > > > > > > > 2. Deficit in the flux of muon neutrinos in case of atmospheric neutrinos observed - YES.
> > > > > > > > > 3. Deficit in the flux of reactor electron anti-neutrinos observed - YES.
> > > > > > > > > 4. Deficit in the flux of particle accelerator beam muon neutrinos observed - YES.
> > > > > > > > > 5. Deficit in the flux of particle accelerator beam of tau neutrinos observed - YES.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The claim neutrinos change flavor - NO.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > If I remember right
> > > > > > > > > (correctness of this my memory picture this should be checked from my old postings)
> > > > > > > > > that in old H-M's drawing the space-potato particle those neutrinos are always grouped three
> > > > > > > > > different color neutrinos together ? I don't know what this could mean ?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > New explanations are needed to explain 1.- 4. above ?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I don't understand what is mass eigenstate/s of neutrino/s ?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Could this be something similar that photon has quantum mechanical mass
> > > > > > > > > m = h*v/c^2, but this is not rest mass of photon which is zero
> > > > > > > > > (special relativity says that rest mass of photon is m0 = 0 )?
> > > > > > > > > (h = Plack's constant, v = frequency of light, c = speed of light in vacuum)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hannu
> > > > > > > > I found one old posting of mine from sci.physics Google Group.
> > > > > > > > Here seems to be something about groupings of color wrong neutrinos
> > > > > > > > and color right neutrinos and color small right neutrinos.
> > > > > > > > I don't understand what these color groupings mean?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I put COPY of it here below
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Reference:
> > > > > > > > Hannu Poropudas, 2003.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Re: About Solar Neutrino Problem
> > > > > > > > sci.physics, Google Groups, Oct 3, 2003, 11:23:15 AM
> > > > > > > > hannu.p...@osakk.fi's profile photo
> > > > > > > > hannu.p...@osakk.fi
> > > > > > > > unread,
> > > > > > > > Oct 3, 2003, 11:23:15 AM
> > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > basti...@gmx.net (Bastian) wrote in message news:<44d6926c.03100...@posting.google.com>...
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Seems to me you mix up a couple of things. Here an explanation:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 1) Yes there is an neutrino flux. The fusion processes in the sun
> > > > > > > > > generate this flux. Without the fusion processes the sun would
> > > > > > > > > collaps. BUT this neutrino flux
> > > > > > > > > is emitted isotropically - and of course there is nothing like a
> > > > > > > > > "center of the space".
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 2) There are three species of neutrinos (very well known from the
> > > > > > > > > measurement of the Z^0 -resonance at CERN). There is a small unlikely
> > > > > > > > > possibility for a 4th generation of very heavy neutrinos (nu-mass >
> > > > > > > > > Z^0-mass).
> > > > > > > > > All neutrinos are left-handed. What does it mean? Neutrinos have spin
> > > > > > > > > (spin 1/2). For massless particles the spin could be aligned or
> > > > > > > > > anti-aligned with the direction of the movement (actually one would
> > > > > > > > > rather speak about helicity a which is the spin projection into the
> > > > > > > > > direction of movement). All neutrinos are anti-aligned. The reason is
> > > > > > > > > that the weak interaction only produces left-handed neutrinos (why? we
> > > > > > > > > do not know). There is no possibility to produce them (no interatction
> > > > > > > > > for this particles) and there is also no possibility to detect them
> > > > > > > > > directly (again - no interaction). The only way to detect them would
> > > > > > > > > be to observe a left-handed/right-handed oszillation.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Yes, I understand what you mean. If neutrino has mass then there
> > > > > > > > exist also corresponding "right-handed neutrino". But I used
> > > > > > > > words "right neutrino" and "wrong neutrino" which are not
> > > > > > > > same matter as "left-handed neutrino" and "right-handed neutrino".
> > > > > > > > Words I used and uou used are possible close each other but some
> > > > > > > > differences exits that is why different names.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > In H-M's drawings different kind of color electricity interactions
> > > > > > > > was described (quite mesh because I don't understand this clearly).
> > > > > > > > I put below some descriptions which I found from my summaries:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 0. "Mass puts different color electricity colors."
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 1. "Three existing neutrinos have two colors: green and violet.
> > > > > > > > These colors are the two types of electricity in the contracting
> > > > > > > > Universe. There exist "voltage" in neutrinos that originates
> > > > > > > > from the contracting Universe."
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Does this above 1. fit also to properties of color magnetic monopoles?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If this would be true then also
> > > > > > > color neutrinos are same as color magnetic monopoles
> > > > > > > as I have earlier guessed in my old postings?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > (Contracting parts of the Universe would be
> > > > > > > for example inside event horizons of black holes?)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > This "voltage" which originates from contracting parts of the Universe
> > > > > > > could mean that these color neutrinos have also electric field
> > > > > > > around them when they move with some velocity v ?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If this would be true then these color neutrinos interacts
> > > > > > > with matter also with coupling of their electric field with
> > > > > > > electric field inside matter through which they penetrate
> > > > > > > with some velocity v ?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > By the way I have translated (my poor english)
> > > > > > > finnish word "violetti" to english word "violet"
> > > > > > > Better translation is to translate finnish "violetti"
> > > > > > > to english could be "purple" ?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Please take a look on my Hannu Poropudas Facebook public
> > > > > > > color photographs of those old H-M's old color drawings
> > > > > > > to see correct english word to those colors?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Best Regards,
> > > > > > > Hannu Poropudas
> > > > > > I noticed that I have wrote randomly names of one
> > > > > > old H-M's color drawing called "Higgsin hiukkaset" (Higgs Particles in english)
> > > > > > and MY ERROR: I did not ask in due time H-M those correct names and which
> > > > > > color correspond to which particle when I wrote randomly those names
> > > > > > on that H-M's drawing (Z0, W+, W- and H0, H+, H-).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I know that names Z0, W+ and W- are correct but I don't know which
> > > > > > color each of which corresponds.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think that names H0, H+, H- should
> > > > > > be rejected due question is certainly not MSSM (=Minimal Supersymmetrical Model)
> > > > > > Higgs Bosons in this case. Maybe those other three are corresponding particles
> > > > > > in contracting parts of the Universe ?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Following names remain (Z0, W+, W- and "God Particle").
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I don't know that should additional "Higgs Particle" be called
> > > > > > "God Particle" due H-M said in due time about that "God Particle" same as
> > > > > > "Me" when H-M meant herself (I don't understand this at all, except if God
> > > > > > spoke through H-M similar way as in case of prophets in the Holy Bible) ?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This old H-M's color drawing "Higgsin hiukkaset" is also
> > > > > > public in Hannu Poropudas Facebook.
> > > > > > Best Regards, Hannu Poropudas
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 2. "Wrong neutrinos": Yellow, Orange, Blue, Brown.
> > > > > > > > Groupings (couplings):
> > > > > > > > Blue, Orange, Yellow.
> > > > > > > > Orange, Yellow, Blue.
> > > > > > > > Brown, Blue, Yellow, Orange.
> > > > > > > > Blue, Yellow, Orange.
> > > > > > > > Brown, Yellow, Blue.
> > > > > > > > "Right neutrinos": (four big ones): Yellow, Blue, Orange, Brown.
> > > > > > > > (six small ones):
> > > > > > > > Yellow, Blue, Brown.
> > > > > > > > Orange, Orange, Blue.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 3. Color electricity flash of lightnings:
> > > > > > > > Blue, Yellow, Orange, Brown.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 4. Neutrinos have so called "magic" and so called "wonderfulness".
> > > > > > > > "Magic" is possibly related to dimensions in 10-dimension Universe
> > > > > > > > (total dimensionality of the Universe which contains our expanding
> > > > > > > > Universe and this present unknown contracting Universe).
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 5. Exotic "space-potato particle has four different species of
> > > > > > > > neutrinos
> > > > > > > > in its structure and neutrinos are always grouped (coupled) three
> > > > > > > > neutrinos together. "Mirror" structure contains couples of "small
> > > > > > > > right neutrinos"
> > > > > > > > and those "hour glass forms" (pre-geomtric form ?, center of which
> > > > > > > > is that "small neutrino couple" od certain color electricity color
> > > > > > > > couples).
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 6. 1,2,3,4,5,6 neutrinos groupins (one remark on the H-M's drawing).
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 7. In photon of contracting Universe (one H-M's drawing):
> > > > > > > > Red and Blue forms a couple.
> > > > > > > > Green and light Blue is a couple.
> > > > > > > > Orange and light red is a couple.
> > > > > > > > Violet and yellow is a couple.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Background blue in the drawing is space blue of empty space which
> > > > > > > > is no color electricity.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 8. Color circle (in one H-M's drawing):
> > > > > > > > Yellow periphery and white center and
> > > > > > > > sectors: green, red, blue, light green, violet, orange.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Green and white are the best "magic colors".
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > (So I put here allmost all which I found from my article summaries:
> > > > > > > > Readme_all.txt, Readme_mid.txt and Readme_see.txt )
> > > > > I put here also important color electricity colors of leptons
> > > > > (electron, mu-lepton, tau-lepton and 4.th-lepton) from H-M's old drawing
> > > > >
> > > > > Electron:
> > > > > - two colors are used due final color would be bright orange color.
> > > > > - bright yellow and light red.
> > > > > -darker red color shine of color electricity spot which is in center of suction spot.
> > > > >
> > > > > mu-lepton:
> > > > > -two colors are used due final color would be King's cloak (="viitta" in finnish) violet (=purple, correct english term).
> > > > > -light blue and light red.
> > > > > - darker color shine of color electricity spot which is in center of suction spot.
> > > > >
> > > > > tau-lepton:
> > > > > -one color.
> > > > > -green.
> > > > > -darker green color shine of color electricity spot which is in center of suction spot.
> > > > >
> > > > > 4.th-lepton:
> > > > > -light brown and gray-brown (this gray-brown color is not suction),
> > > > > -red-brown (this is not suction and H-M's drawing is looked from above),
> > > > > - dent (= "lommo" in finnish and H-M's drawing is looked from above),
> > > > > -4.th-lepton is different than other three leptons above,
> > > > > but this 4.th-lepton has not much significance for physics.
> > > > >
> > > > > It is my opinion that we should try to correct our present standard model
> > > > > of particle physics with these H-M's drawings as "axioms of astrophysics" ?
> > > > >
> > > > > These and other H-M's old drawings are public in my Hannu Poropudas Facebook.
> > > > >
> > > > > Best Regards,
> > > > >
> > > > > Hannu Poropudas,
> > > > > Kolamäentie 9E, 90900 Kiiminki / Oulu, Finland.
> > > > I forget to say that in H-M's old drawing about black hole there is also drawn this
> > > > 4.th neutrino, green color electricity color and its shape is
> > > > strange 4-polygon with four cornes. This color eclectrity 4-polygon was drawn near the tau-neutrino.
> > > >
> > > > I forget also mention about above text of mine four leptons that
> > > > those suction spots which are drawn on the surface above described leptons
> > > > are interpreted by me such that colorless electric field (our familiar E-field?) originates from them.
> > > > And from suction spot starts to be formed towards inside of the surface
> > > > and finally to the center of the surface tornado like
> > > > color electricity tornado (really form of cone).
> > > > I have interpreted that suction spot is only one side due the spin (=1/2) of
> > > > corresponding color electricity neutrino which H-M called long time ago
> > > > the soul of corresponding lepton.
> > > >
> > > > This copy below is due that I think that now it could be possible
> > > > to correct our present standard model of physics?
> > > >
> > > > I put here also in addition important color electricity colors of
> > > > H-M's old drawings of four quarks and also color electricity colors of proton/neutron:
> > > >
> > > > First those four quarks (H-M's old drawing they are 8-polygons,
> > > > which are in place of color electricity black hole's singularity):
> > > >
> > > > 1. -green (and no scratches = "naarmuja" in finnish)
> > > > 2. -red (two blue scrathes which intersects each others,
> > > > when one 8/8-single cut diamond has scrathed this quark in its born process).
> > > > 3. -violet (correct english term for my finnish term violet is purple,
> > > > two red scrathes which do not intersect each others,
> > > > two 8/8-single cut diamonds have scrathed this quark in its born process)
> > > > 4. -yellow (no scrathes).
> > > >
> > > > Scrathes are born due stratchings of 8/8-single cut diamods (which I have later
> > > > called creation stones of the Universe. In H-M's drawing these are two different
> > > > types of these 8/8-single cut diamonds.)
> > > >
> > > > Background color electricity color is not drawn although it should also be there.
> > > >
> > > > Background color electricity color is light blue (= empty space's color electricity color
> > > > which is not color ecltricity.)
> > > >
> > > > Proton / Neutron H-M's old drawing:
> > > >
> > > > Color cicle is (this is half proton and half neutron for both):
> > > > 1. -violet (correct english term should be purple), (I have interpreted this weak interaction color),
> > > > 2. -dark green, (I have interpreted this weak interaction color),
> > > > 3. - light red, (I have interpreted this strong interaction color),
> > > > 4. -yellow, (I have interpreted this strong interaction color),
> > > > 5. -light blue, (I have interpreted this strong interaction color).
> > > >
> > > > Proton/Neutron from other side looked:
> > > >
> > > > 1. violet (correct english term should be purple) light periphery (="valokehä" in finnish) circle
> > > > with violet spot in center and center of this spot is small dark violet spot,
> > > > 2. green light periphery circle
> > > > with green spot in center and center of this spot is small dark violet spot,
> > > > 3. light red light periphery circle
> > > > with light red spot in center and center of this spot is small dark violet spot,
> > > > 4. light red light periphery circle (check color from H-M's drawing, if light blue is correct?)
> > > > with light blue spot in center and center of this spot is small dark violet spot,
> > > > 5. yellow light periphery circle
> > > > with yellow spot in center and center of this spot is small dark violet spot.
> > > >
> > > > I have interpreted those color electricity periphery circles as color electricity gluons
> > > > (couples of color electricity neutrinos)?
> > > >
> > > > Background color is space's dark blue (stars are mark of space's color).
> > > >
> > > > Proton is such that one of those five quarks is black (or space's color dark blue?)
> > > > due mass of proton has changed color electricity color to no color electricity.
> > > > Combination of four color electricity colors are stable.
> > > >
> > > > Neutron is such that as H-M's old explanation said " one day neutron has those five color electricity colors
> > > > and an second day it has this color electricity structure of proton..
> > > >
> > > > So proton and neutron are same particle's two different states as I have interpreted it.
> > > >
> > > > Please CHECK those colors from photographs of those original H-M's drawings
> > > > which are public on my Hannu Poropudas Facebook
> > > > due I copied these here from my memory pages.
> > > >
> > > > Best Regards,
> > > > Hannu Poropudas
> > > > Kolamäentie 9E,
> > > > 90900 Kiiminki / Oulu
> > > > Finland.
> > > I put here copies of two old my postings (1994 and 1995) from sci.physics.particle
> > > due that I think that NOW should be time to think what kind of
> > > mathematics could be tried in case of H-M's old drawings?
> > >
> > > I think that this below Dirac's Nonlinear Equation could be worth to try to
> > > leptons (electron, mu-lepton, tau-lepton).
> > >
> > > Neutrinos (electron-neutrino, mu-lepton neutrino,
> > > tau-lepton neutrino) have their rest mass = 0, so at least u = 0 in below equation.
> > > Maybe some additional modifications is still needed in case of neutrinos ?
> > >
> > > Some open questions about representation conventions must also be solved first.
> > > Best Regards, Hannu Poropudas, Kolamäentie 9E, 90900 Kiiminki / Oulu, Finland.
> > > ----- TWO COPIES BELOW 1. and 2. ------------
> > > 1.
> > > Dirac's Nonlinear Equation
> > > 1 katselukerta
> > > Tilaa
> > > Käyttäjän Hannu Poropudas profiilikuva
> > > Hannu Poropudas
> > > 30.1.1994 klo 18.55.33
> > > vastaanottaja
> > >
> > > I have here Dirac's Nonlinear Equation:
> > >
> > >
> > > k^a (D/Dx^a - C_a)P - l^2 (P_bar k k^b P) k k_b P - uP = 0
> > >
> > > where l^2 = 3pi G_F /(h_bar c),
> > > G_F is Weak interaction's Fermi constant 1.43582*10^-62 Jm^3 (SI-units)
> > > u = m_0 c /h_bar, P is Dirac's four component spinor wave function,
> > > a,b = 0,1,2,3.
> > > C_a is spinor connection coefficients,
> > > D is ordinary partial derivative.
> > > k^a = k^0,k^1,k^2,k^3 are Dirac's matrices which depend on space
> > > time.
> > >
> > > Question is now: How would you define k_5 (in Russian way), if
> > > k = i k_5, where i = (-1)^1/2 and det(g_ij) is determinant of
> > > metric basic tensor.?
> > >
> > > I have one reference: Encyclopedia of Mathematics, vol. 3,
> > > Kluver Academic Publishers , 1989. This is english translation
> > > from: Soviet Mathematical Encyclopaedia, Soviet Encyclopaedia
> > > Publishing House (1977 - 1985), Parts 1-5 + some other later
> > > parts.
> > >
> > >
> > > Best Regards,
> > > Hannu Poropudas
> > > hapo...@freenet.hut.fi
> > >
> > > "Due to the neutrino cages all souls are divided only to two groups.
> > > Those which can go through them and those which remain in them to
> > > wait fire expansion stopping of the visible Universe."
> > >
> > > ----------------------------------
> > > 2.
> > >
> > > Käyttäjän Hannu Poropudas profiilikuva
> > > Hannu Poropudas
> > > lukematon,
> > > 21.7.1995 klo 10.00.00
> > > vastaanottaja
> > >
> > > I refer here to my posting 'Dirac's Nonlinear Equation',
> > > <2igoq5$t...@freenet.hut.fi>, which was dated 30 Jan 1994:
> > >
> > > I have then a little problem with Russian units and
> > > I did not got any help then, now I would like to repeat
> > > the question:
> > >
> > > k^a (D/Dx^a - C_a)P - l^2 (P* kk^b P) kk_b P - uP = 0,
> > >
> > > where I have modified l^2 constant to be
> > >
> > > l^2 = 3pi G_F /(h_bar c), where G_F is weak interaction
> > > Fermi constant = 1.43582 *10^-62 Jm^3 (in SI-units).
> > >
> > > u = m_0 c/h_bar,
> > >
> > > h_bar = h/(2pi), h = Planck's constant, pi = 3.14159...,
> > >
> > > m_0 is the rest mass of the particle (spin=h_bar/2).
> > >
> > > P = Dirac's four component spinor wave function,
> > >
> > > a,b = 0,1,2,3,
> > >
> > > C_a = Spinor connection coefficients,
> > >
> > > D is ordinary partial derivative,
> > >
> > > k^a = k^0, k^1, k^2, k^3 are Dirac's matrices, which
> > > depend on space and time.
> > >
> > > (g_ij) is the determinant of metric basic tensor
> > > (Russian way uses here different signature in flat space-time
> > > case. In this case g_ij depends on space and time.)
> > >
> > > My problem is how to define k = ik_5 properly in
> > > Russian units or all above in most understandable and
> > > most easiest SI-units.?
> > >
> > > REFERENCE:
> > >
> > > Encyclopedia of Mathematics, 1989.
> > > Vol.3, Cluver Academic Publishers.
> > > (Transl. Soviet Mathematical Encyclopaedia,
> > > Soviet Encyclopaedia Publishing House, 1977-1985-?,
> > > Parts 1-10.)
> > >
> > > ---
> > >
> > >
> > > Best Regards,
> > >
> > > Hannu Poropudas.
> > >
> > > "It's Not What You Know That Matters
> > > ... It's Knowing What You Don't."
> > > -----------------------------------------------
> >
> > CORRECTION
> >
> > P_bar or P* are wrong markings of complex conjugate of P
> > in above old postings of mine.
> >
> > -----
> > REMARK (important):
> >
> > I found one interesting article about approximate exact colorless solution
> > which used characterictic dimensions l* for strong gravity hypothesis
> > l* = (8*Pi*h_bar*G_s/c^3)^(1/2) = approximately 10^(-13) cm, (1.11)..
> > (l* = l and e=+1 in later text of (Mielke E W 1981) )
> >
> > (In my old postings this would be replaced by l* = l, where
> >
> > l^2 = 3pi G_F /(h_bar c),
> >
> > G_F is Weak interaction's Fermi constant 1.43582*10^-62 Jm^3 (SI-units)..
> > And same Mielke E W radial solution would be used but now with different l.
> >
> > And now instead of quarks there are colorless leptons in question in this radial
> > approximate exact solution.
> > And colorless neutrinos case is modified perhaps little differently?)
> >
> > (Definition of Phi, which was in my old postings called as P is (1.3 on page 2).)
> > (Definitions of Mielke are (1.1)-(1.3) and (2.1) - (2.9))
> >
> > Melke (Mielke E W 1981) used little different definitions for naming and
> > different notations than what I used in those above old postings of mine.
> >
> > So these definitions and markings of (Mielke E W 1981) are used now
> > and you have to look all equations reference mentioned in this preprint article,
> > which has Mielke's hand written equations)
> >
> > Approximation was explained on pages 6 - 7 (I put explanation of this approximation below copy "...").
> > in Lagrangian densitty (2.1) on page 5 and page 6 - 7
> >
> > "According to well-known relations between scalar products of bilinear forms
> > containing identical spinors the self-interaction in (2.1), which is of the axial-vector-type,
> > may be replaced by a scalar-minus-a-pseudoscalar-type self-coupling, i.e.,
> > (2.10) equations on page 6."
> >
> > (Approximation was such that this last pseudo-scalar term was dopped away.)
> >
> > "Therefore it is justified to a certain extent to consider instead of (1.2) on page 2"
> >
> > (Which I have called on my old postings nonlinear Dirac's equation.)
> >
> > "Therefore it is justified to certain extent to consider instead of (1.2) on page 2 the
> > nonlinear Dirac equation (2.11) on page 6"
> >
> > (radial part of which (2.11) is solved exactly in (Mieleke E W 1981) article,
> > pp. 7 - 24, please take a look these pages.
> > Unfortunately no plotted figures of these solutions was included.)
> >
> > " having an algebraically simplified self-interaction.
> > (The inclusion of the pseudoscalar term would lead to a more intricate model.)"
> >
> > REFERENCE :
> > Mielke Eckehard W. 1981.
> > Toward exact solutions of the nonlinear Heisenberg-Pauli-Weyl spinor equation.
> > Journal of Mathematical Physics, Vol. 22, 2034 (1981).
> > (This article is also readable from the free preprint pdf:
> > https://stramings.ictp.it/preprints/P/80/045.pdf
> > IC/80/45, Internal Report (Limited distribution), 12 double pages, pp. 1-24.)
> >
> > Sorry that I was not able to write equations anymore here.
> >
> > Best Regards, Hannu Poropudas, Kolamäentie 9E, 90900 Kiiminki / Oulu, Finland.
> CORRECTION of free preprint 045.pdf address of Mielke Eckehard W 1981:
> > REFERENCE :
> > Mielke Eckehard W. 1981.
> > Toward exact solutions of the nonlinear Heisenberg-Pauli-Weyl spinor equation.
> > Journal of Mathematical Physics, Vol. 22, 2034 (1981).
> > (This article is also readable from the free preprint pdf:
> > https://stramings.ictp.it/preprints/P/80/045.pdf
> > IC/80/45, Internal Report (Limited distribution), 12 double pages, pp. 1-24.)
> http://streaming.ictp.it/preprints/P/80/045.pdf
>
> Hannu

Click here to read the complete article

On Monday, March 13, 2023 at 2:39:57 AM UTC-7, Hannu Poropudas wrote:
> perjantai 10. maaliskuuta 2023 klo 8.15.23 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > torstai 9. maaliskuuta 2023 klo 16.19.46 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > maanantai 27. helmikuuta 2023 klo 11.44.15 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > > keskiviikko 22. helmikuuta 2023 klo 12.17.05 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > > > maanantai 20. helmikuuta 2023 klo 12.36.00 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > > > > lauantai 21. tammikuuta 2023 klo 10.57.48 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > > > > > perjantai 20. tammikuuta 2023 klo 9.25.28 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > > > > > > tiistai 17. tammikuuta 2023 klo 11.32.43 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > > > > > > > tiistai 17. tammikuuta 2023 klo 10.27.35 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > > > > > > > > maanantai 16. tammikuuta 2023 klo 19.42.24 UTC+2 Tom Roberts kirjoitti:
> > > > > > > > > > > On 1/16/23 4:09 AM, Hannu Poropudas wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > If photon rest mass is zero then rest masses of all types of
> > > > > > > > > > > > neutrinos is zero?
> > > > > > > > > > > No.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Neutrinos are observed to oscillate -- they change flavor as they
> > > > > > > > > > > propagate over distance. This is modeled as flavor eigenstates being
> > > > > > > > > > > different from mass eigenstates. That directly implies that at least two
> > > > > > > > > > > neutrino mass eigenstates (out of three) have nonzero mass; it is likely
> > > > > > > > > > > that all three have nonzero mass. Flavor eigenstates do not have a
> > > > > > > > > > > definite mass. Note that flavor eigenstates appear in the Lagrangian and
> > > > > > > > > > > are how interactions occur, while mass eigenstates describe how they
> > > > > > > > > > > propagate over distance.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Tom Roberts
> > > > > > > > > > 1. Deficit in the flux of solar neutrinos observed - YES.
> > > > > > > > > > 2. Deficit in the flux of muon neutrinos in case of atmospheric neutrinos observed - YES.
> > > > > > > > > > 3. Deficit in the flux of reactor electron anti-neutrinos observed - YES.
> > > > > > > > > > 4. Deficit in the flux of particle accelerator beam muon neutrinos observed - YES.
> > > > > > > > > > 5. Deficit in the flux of particle accelerator beam of tau neutrinos observed - YES.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > The claim neutrinos change flavor - NO.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > If I remember right
> > > > > > > > > > (correctness of this my memory picture this should be checked from my old postings)
> > > > > > > > > > that in old H-M's drawing the space-potato particle those neutrinos are always grouped three
> > > > > > > > > > different color neutrinos together ? I don't know what this could mean ?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > New explanations are needed to explain 1.- 4. above ?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I don't understand what is mass eigenstate/s of neutrino/s ?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Could this be something similar that photon has quantum mechanical mass
> > > > > > > > > > m = h*v/c^2, but this is not rest mass of photon which is zero
> > > > > > > > > > (special relativity says that rest mass of photon is m0 = 0 )?
> > > > > > > > > > (h = Plack's constant, v = frequency of light, c = speed of light in vacuum)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Hannu
> > > > > > > > > I found one old posting of mine from sci.physics Google Group.
> > > > > > > > > Here seems to be something about groupings of color wrong neutrinos
> > > > > > > > > and color right neutrinos and color small right neutrinos..
> > > > > > > > > I don't understand what these color groupings mean?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I put COPY of it here below
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Reference:
> > > > > > > > > Hannu Poropudas, 2003.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Re: About Solar Neutrino Problem
> > > > > > > > > sci.physics, Google Groups, Oct 3, 2003, 11:23:15 AM
> > > > > > > > > hannu.p...@osakk.fi's profile photo
> > > > > > > > > hannu.p...@osakk.fi
> > > > > > > > > unread,
> > > > > > > > > Oct 3, 2003, 11:23:15 AM
> > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > basti...@gmx.net (Bastian) wrote in message news:<44d6926c.03100...@posting.google.com>...
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Seems to me you mix up a couple of things. Here an explanation:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > 1) Yes there is an neutrino flux. The fusion processes in the sun
> > > > > > > > > > generate this flux. Without the fusion processes the sun would
> > > > > > > > > > collaps. BUT this neutrino flux
> > > > > > > > > > is emitted isotropically - and of course there is nothing like a
> > > > > > > > > > "center of the space".
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > 2) There are three species of neutrinos (very well known from the
> > > > > > > > > > measurement of the Z^0 -resonance at CERN). There is a small unlikely
> > > > > > > > > > possibility for a 4th generation of very heavy neutrinos (nu-mass >
> > > > > > > > > > Z^0-mass).
> > > > > > > > > > All neutrinos are left-handed. What does it mean? Neutrinos have spin
> > > > > > > > > > (spin 1/2). For massless particles the spin could be aligned or
> > > > > > > > > > anti-aligned with the direction of the movement (actually one would
> > > > > > > > > > rather speak about helicity a which is the spin projection into the
> > > > > > > > > > direction of movement). All neutrinos are anti-aligned. The reason is
> > > > > > > > > > that the weak interaction only produces left-handed neutrinos (why? we
> > > > > > > > > > do not know). There is no possibility to produce them (no interatction
> > > > > > > > > > for this particles) and there is also no possibility to detect them
> > > > > > > > > > directly (again - no interaction). The only way to detect them would
> > > > > > > > > > be to observe a left-handed/right-handed oszillation.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Yes, I understand what you mean. If neutrino has mass then there
> > > > > > > > > exist also corresponding "right-handed neutrino". But I used
> > > > > > > > > words "right neutrino" and "wrong neutrino" which are not
> > > > > > > > > same matter as "left-handed neutrino" and "right-handed neutrino".
> > > > > > > > > Words I used and uou used are possible close each other but some
> > > > > > > > > differences exits that is why different names.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > In H-M's drawings different kind of color electricity interactions
> > > > > > > > > was described (quite mesh because I don't understand this clearly).
> > > > > > > > > I put below some descriptions which I found from my summaries:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 0. "Mass puts different color electricity colors."
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 1. "Three existing neutrinos have two colors: green and violet.
> > > > > > > > > These colors are the two types of electricity in the contracting
> > > > > > > > > Universe. There exist "voltage" in neutrinos that originates
> > > > > > > > > from the contracting Universe."
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Does this above 1. fit also to properties of color magnetic monopoles?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > If this would be true then also
> > > > > > > > color neutrinos are same as color magnetic monopoles
> > > > > > > > as I have earlier guessed in my old postings?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > (Contracting parts of the Universe would be
> > > > > > > > for example inside event horizons of black holes?)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > This "voltage" which originates from contracting parts of the Universe
> > > > > > > > could mean that these color neutrinos have also electric field
> > > > > > > > around them when they move with some velocity v ?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > If this would be true then these color neutrinos interacts
> > > > > > > > with matter also with coupling of their electric field with
> > > > > > > > electric field inside matter through which they penetrate
> > > > > > > > with some velocity v ?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > By the way I have translated (my poor english)
> > > > > > > > finnish word "violetti" to english word "violet"
> > > > > > > > Better translation is to translate finnish "violetti"
> > > > > > > > to english could be "purple" ?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Please take a look on my Hannu Poropudas Facebook public
> > > > > > > > color photographs of those old H-M's old color drawings
> > > > > > > > to see correct english word to those colors?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Best Regards,
> > > > > > > > Hannu Poropudas
> > > > > > > I noticed that I have wrote randomly names of one
> > > > > > > old H-M's color drawing called "Higgsin hiukkaset" (Higgs Particles in english)
> > > > > > > and MY ERROR: I did not ask in due time H-M those correct names and which
> > > > > > > color correspond to which particle when I wrote randomly those names
> > > > > > > on that H-M's drawing (Z0, W+, W- and H0, H+, H-).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I know that names Z0, W+ and W- are correct but I don't know which
> > > > > > > color each of which corresponds.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I think that names H0, H+, H- should
> > > > > > > be rejected due question is certainly not MSSM (=Minimal Supersymmetrical Model)
> > > > > > > Higgs Bosons in this case. Maybe those other three are corresponding particles
> > > > > > > in contracting parts of the Universe ?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Following names remain (Z0, W+, W- and "God Particle").
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I don't know that should additional "Higgs Particle" be called
> > > > > > > "God Particle" due H-M said in due time about that "God Particle" same as
> > > > > > > "Me" when H-M meant herself (I don't understand this at all, except if God
> > > > > > > spoke through H-M similar way as in case of prophets in the Holy Bible) ?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > This old H-M's color drawing "Higgsin hiukkaset" is also
> > > > > > > public in Hannu Poropudas Facebook.
> > > > > > > Best Regards, Hannu Poropudas
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 2. "Wrong neutrinos": Yellow, Orange, Blue, Brown.
> > > > > > > > > Groupings (couplings):
> > > > > > > > > Blue, Orange, Yellow.
> > > > > > > > > Orange, Yellow, Blue.
> > > > > > > > > Brown, Blue, Yellow, Orange.
> > > > > > > > > Blue, Yellow, Orange.
> > > > > > > > > Brown, Yellow, Blue.
> > > > > > > > > "Right neutrinos": (four big ones): Yellow, Blue, Orange, Brown.
> > > > > > > > > (six small ones):
> > > > > > > > > Yellow, Blue, Brown.
> > > > > > > > > Orange, Orange, Blue.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 3. Color electricity flash of lightnings:
> > > > > > > > > Blue, Yellow, Orange, Brown.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 4. Neutrinos have so called "magic" and so called "wonderfulness".
> > > > > > > > > "Magic" is possibly related to dimensions in 10-dimension Universe
> > > > > > > > > (total dimensionality of the Universe which contains our expanding
> > > > > > > > > Universe and this present unknown contracting Universe).
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 5. Exotic "space-potato particle has four different species of
> > > > > > > > > neutrinos
> > > > > > > > > in its structure and neutrinos are always grouped (coupled) three
> > > > > > > > > neutrinos together. "Mirror" structure contains couples of "small
> > > > > > > > > right neutrinos"
> > > > > > > > > and those "hour glass forms" (pre-geomtric form ?, center of which
> > > > > > > > > is that "small neutrino couple" od certain color electricity color
> > > > > > > > > couples).
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 6. 1,2,3,4,5,6 neutrinos groupins (one remark on the H-M's drawing).
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 7. In photon of contracting Universe (one H-M's drawing):
> > > > > > > > > Red and Blue forms a couple.
> > > > > > > > > Green and light Blue is a couple.
> > > > > > > > > Orange and light red is a couple.
> > > > > > > > > Violet and yellow is a couple.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Background blue in the drawing is space blue of empty space which
> > > > > > > > > is no color electricity.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 8. Color circle (in one H-M's drawing):
> > > > > > > > > Yellow periphery and white center and
> > > > > > > > > sectors: green, red, blue, light green, violet, orange.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Green and white are the best "magic colors".
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > -
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > (So I put here allmost all which I found from my article summaries:
> > > > > > > > > Readme_all.txt, Readme_mid.txt and Readme_see.txt )
> > > > > > I put here also important color electricity colors of leptons
> > > > > > (electron, mu-lepton, tau-lepton and 4.th-lepton) from H-M's old drawing
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Electron:
> > > > > > - two colors are used due final color would be bright orange color.
> > > > > > - bright yellow and light red.
> > > > > > -darker red color shine of color electricity spot which is in center of suction spot.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > mu-lepton:
> > > > > > -two colors are used due final color would be King's cloak (="viitta" in finnish) violet (=purple, correct english term).
> > > > > > -light blue and light red.
> > > > > > - darker color shine of color electricity spot which is in center of suction spot.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > tau-lepton:
> > > > > > -one color.
> > > > > > -green.
> > > > > > -darker green color shine of color electricity spot which is in center of suction spot.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 4.th-lepton:
> > > > > > -light brown and gray-brown (this gray-brown color is not suction),
> > > > > > -red-brown (this is not suction and H-M's drawing is looked from above),
> > > > > > - dent (= "lommo" in finnish and H-M's drawing is looked from above),
> > > > > > -4.th-lepton is different than other three leptons above,
> > > > > > but this 4.th-lepton has not much significance for physics.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It is my opinion that we should try to correct our present standard model
> > > > > > of particle physics with these H-M's drawings as "axioms of astrophysics" ?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > These and other H-M's old drawings are public in my Hannu Poropudas Facebook.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best Regards,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hannu Poropudas,
> > > > > > Kolamäentie 9E, 90900 Kiiminki / Oulu, Finland.
> > > > > I forget to say that in H-M's old drawing about black hole there is also drawn this
> > > > > 4.th neutrino, green color electricity color and its shape is
> > > > > strange 4-polygon with four cornes. This color eclectrity 4-polygon was drawn near the tau-neutrino.
> > > > >
> > > > > I forget also mention about above text of mine four leptons that
> > > > > those suction spots which are drawn on the surface above described leptons
> > > > > are interpreted by me such that colorless electric field (our familiar E-field?) originates from them.
> > > > > And from suction spot starts to be formed towards inside of the surface
> > > > > and finally to the center of the surface tornado like
> > > > > color electricity tornado (really form of cone).
> > > > > I have interpreted that suction spot is only one side due the spin (=1/2) of
> > > > > corresponding color electricity neutrino which H-M called long time ago
> > > > > the soul of corresponding lepton.
> > > > >
> > > > > This copy below is due that I think that now it could be possible
> > > > > to correct our present standard model of physics?
> > > > >
> > > > > I put here also in addition important color electricity colors of
> > > > > H-M's old drawings of four quarks and also color electricity colors of proton/neutron:
> > > > >
> > > > > First those four quarks (H-M's old drawing they are 8-polygons,
> > > > > which are in place of color electricity black hole's singularity):
> > > > >
> > > > > 1. -green (and no scratches = "naarmuja" in finnish)
> > > > > 2. -red (two blue scrathes which intersects each others,
> > > > > when one 8/8-single cut diamond has scrathed this quark in its born process).
> > > > > 3. -violet (correct english term for my finnish term violet is purple,
> > > > > two red scrathes which do not intersect each others,
> > > > > two 8/8-single cut diamonds have scrathed this quark in its born process)
> > > > > 4. -yellow (no scrathes).
> > > > >
> > > > > Scrathes are born due stratchings of 8/8-single cut diamods (which I have later
> > > > > called creation stones of the Universe. In H-M's drawing these are two different
> > > > > types of these 8/8-single cut diamonds.)
> > > > >
> > > > > Background color electricity color is not drawn although it should also be there.
> > > > >
> > > > > Background color electricity color is light blue (= empty space's color electricity color
> > > > > which is not color ecltricity.)
> > > > >
> > > > > Proton / Neutron H-M's old drawing:
> > > > >
> > > > > Color cicle is (this is half proton and half neutron for both):
> > > > > 1. -violet (correct english term should be purple), (I have interpreted this weak interaction color),
> > > > > 2. -dark green, (I have interpreted this weak interaction color),
> > > > > 3. - light red, (I have interpreted this strong interaction color),
> > > > > 4. -yellow, (I have interpreted this strong interaction color),
> > > > > 5. -light blue, (I have interpreted this strong interaction color).
> > > > >
> > > > > Proton/Neutron from other side looked:
> > > > >
> > > > > 1. violet (correct english term should be purple) light periphery (="valokehä" in finnish) circle
> > > > > with violet spot in center and center of this spot is small dark violet spot,
> > > > > 2. green light periphery circle
> > > > > with green spot in center and center of this spot is small dark violet spot,
> > > > > 3. light red light periphery circle
> > > > > with light red spot in center and center of this spot is small dark violet spot,
> > > > > 4. light red light periphery circle (check color from H-M's drawing, if light blue is correct?)
> > > > > with light blue spot in center and center of this spot is small dark violet spot,
> > > > > 5. yellow light periphery circle
> > > > > with yellow spot in center and center of this spot is small dark violet spot.
> > > > >
> > > > > I have interpreted those color electricity periphery circles as color electricity gluons
> > > > > (couples of color electricity neutrinos)?
> > > > >
> > > > > Background color is space's dark blue (stars are mark of space's color).
> > > > >
> > > > > Proton is such that one of those five quarks is black (or space's color dark blue?)
> > > > > due mass of proton has changed color electricity color to no color electricity.
> > > > > Combination of four color electricity colors are stable.
> > > > >
> > > > > Neutron is such that as H-M's old explanation said " one day neutron has those five color electricity colors
> > > > > and an second day it has this color electricity structure of proton.
> > > > >
> > > > > So proton and neutron are same particle's two different states as I have interpreted it.
> > > > >
> > > > > Please CHECK those colors from photographs of those original H-M's drawings
> > > > > which are public on my Hannu Poropudas Facebook
> > > > > due I copied these here from my memory pages.
> > > > >
> > > > > Best Regards,
> > > > > Hannu Poropudas
> > > > > Kolamäentie 9E,
> > > > > 90900 Kiiminki / Oulu
> > > > > Finland.
> > > > I put here copies of two old my postings (1994 and 1995) from sci.physics.particle
> > > > due that I think that NOW should be time to think what kind of
> > > > mathematics could be tried in case of H-M's old drawings?
> > > >
> > > > I think that this below Dirac's Nonlinear Equation could be worth to try to
> > > > leptons (electron, mu-lepton, tau-lepton).
> > > >
> > > > Neutrinos (electron-neutrino, mu-lepton neutrino,
> > > > tau-lepton neutrino) have their rest mass = 0, so at least u = 0 in below equation.
> > > > Maybe some additional modifications is still needed in case of neutrinos ?
> > > >
> > > > Some open questions about representation conventions must also be solved first.
> > > > Best Regards, Hannu Poropudas, Kolamäentie 9E, 90900 Kiiminki / Oulu, Finland.
> > > > ----- TWO COPIES BELOW 1. and 2. ------------
> > > > 1.
> > > > Dirac's Nonlinear Equation
> > > > 1 katselukerta
> > > > Tilaa
> > > > Käyttäjän Hannu Poropudas profiilikuva
> > > > Hannu Poropudas
> > > > 30.1.1994 klo 18.55.33
> > > > vastaanottaja
> > > >
> > > > I have here Dirac's Nonlinear Equation:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > k^a (D/Dx^a - C_a)P - l^2 (P_bar k k^b P) k k_b P - uP = 0
> > > >
> > > > where l^2 = 3pi G_F /(h_bar c),
> > > > G_F is Weak interaction's Fermi constant 1.43582*10^-62 Jm^3 (SI-units)
> > > > u = m_0 c /h_bar, P is Dirac's four component spinor wave function,
> > > > a,b = 0,1,2,3.
> > > > C_a is spinor connection coefficients,
> > > > D is ordinary partial derivative.
> > > > k^a = k^0,k^1,k^2,k^3 are Dirac's matrices which depend on space
> > > > time.
> > > >
> > > > Question is now: How would you define k_5 (in Russian way), if
> > > > k = i k_5, where i = (-1)^1/2 and det(g_ij) is determinant of
> > > > metric basic tensor.?
> > > >
> > > > I have one reference: Encyclopedia of Mathematics, vol. 3,
> > > > Kluver Academic Publishers , 1989. This is english translation
> > > > from: Soviet Mathematical Encyclopaedia, Soviet Encyclopaedia
> > > > Publishing House (1977 - 1985), Parts 1-5 + some other later
> > > > parts.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Best Regards,
> > > > Hannu Poropudas
> > > > hapo...@freenet.hut.fi
> > > >
> > > > "Due to the neutrino cages all souls are divided only to two groups..
> > > > Those which can go through them and those which remain in them to
> > > > wait fire expansion stopping of the visible Universe."
> > > >
> > > > ----------------------------------
> > > > 2.
> > > >
> > > > Käyttäjän Hannu Poropudas profiilikuva
> > > > Hannu Poropudas
> > > > lukematon,
> > > > 21.7.1995 klo 10.00.00
> > > > vastaanottaja
> > > >
> > > > I refer here to my posting 'Dirac's Nonlinear Equation',
> > > > <2igoq5$t...@freenet.hut.fi>, which was dated 30 Jan 1994:
> > > >
> > > > I have then a little problem with Russian units and
> > > > I did not got any help then, now I would like to repeat
> > > > the question:
> > > >
> > > > k^a (D/Dx^a - C_a)P - l^2 (P* kk^b P) kk_b P - uP = 0,
> > > >
> > > > where I have modified l^2 constant to be
> > > >
> > > > l^2 = 3pi G_F /(h_bar c), where G_F is weak interaction
> > > > Fermi constant = 1.43582 *10^-62 Jm^3 (in SI-units).
> > > >
> > > > u = m_0 c/h_bar,
> > > >
> > > > h_bar = h/(2pi), h = Planck's constant, pi = 3.14159...,
> > > >
> > > > m_0 is the rest mass of the particle (spin=h_bar/2).
> > > >
> > > > P = Dirac's four component spinor wave function,
> > > >
> > > > a,b = 0,1,2,3,
> > > >
> > > > C_a = Spinor connection coefficients,
> > > >
> > > > D is ordinary partial derivative,
> > > >
> > > > k^a = k^0, k^1, k^2, k^3 are Dirac's matrices, which
> > > > depend on space and time.
> > > >
> > > > (g_ij) is the determinant of metric basic tensor
> > > > (Russian way uses here different signature in flat space-time
> > > > case. In this case g_ij depends on space and time.)
> > > >
> > > > My problem is how to define k = ik_5 properly in
> > > > Russian units or all above in most understandable and
> > > > most easiest SI-units.?
> > > >
> > > > REFERENCE:
> > > >
> > > > Encyclopedia of Mathematics, 1989.
> > > > Vol.3, Cluver Academic Publishers.
> > > > (Transl. Soviet Mathematical Encyclopaedia,
> > > > Soviet Encyclopaedia Publishing House, 1977-1985-?,
> > > > Parts 1-10.)
> > > >
> > > > ---
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Best Regards,
> > > >
> > > > Hannu Poropudas.
> > > >
> > > > "It's Not What You Know That Matters
> > > > ... It's Knowing What You Don't."
> > > > -----------------------------------------------
> > >
> > > CORRECTION
> > >
> > > P_bar or P* are wrong markings of complex conjugate of P
> > > in above old postings of mine.
> > >
> > > -----
> > > REMARK (important):
> > >
> > > I found one interesting article about approximate exact colorless solution
> > > which used characterictic dimensions l* for strong gravity hypothesis
> > > l* = (8*Pi*h_bar*G_s/c^3)^(1/2) = approximately 10^(-13) cm, (1.11).
> > > (l* = l and e=+1 in later text of (Mielke E W 1981) )
> > >
> > > (In my old postings this would be replaced by l* = l, where
> > >
> > > l^2 = 3pi G_F /(h_bar c),
> > >
> > > G_F is Weak interaction's Fermi constant 1.43582*10^-62 Jm^3 (SI-units).
> > > And same Mielke E W radial solution would be used but now with different l.
> > >
> > > And now instead of quarks there are colorless leptons in question in this radial
> > > approximate exact solution.
> > > And colorless neutrinos case is modified perhaps little differently?)
> > >
> > > (Definition of Phi, which was in my old postings called as P is (1.3 on page 2).)
> > > (Definitions of Mielke are (1.1)-(1.3) and (2.1) - (2.9))
> > >
> > > Melke (Mielke E W 1981) used little different definitions for naming and
> > > different notations than what I used in those above old postings of mine.
> > >
> > > So these definitions and markings of (Mielke E W 1981) are used now
> > > and you have to look all equations reference mentioned in this preprint article,
> > > which has Mielke's hand written equations)
> > >
> > > Approximation was explained on pages 6 - 7 (I put explanation of this approximation below copy "...").
> > > in Lagrangian densitty (2.1) on page 5 and page 6 - 7
> > >
> > > "According to well-known relations between scalar products of bilinear forms
> > > containing identical spinors the self-interaction in (2.1), which is of the axial-vector-type,
> > > may be replaced by a scalar-minus-a-pseudoscalar-type self-coupling, i.e.,
> > > (2.10) equations on page 6."
> > >
> > > (Approximation was such that this last pseudo-scalar term was dopped away.)
> > >
> > > "Therefore it is justified to a certain extent to consider instead of (1.2) on page 2"
> > >
> > > (Which I have called on my old postings nonlinear Dirac's equation.)
> > >
> > > "Therefore it is justified to certain extent to consider instead of (1.2) on page 2 the
> > > nonlinear Dirac equation (2.11) on page 6"
> > >
> > > (radial part of which (2.11) is solved exactly in (Mieleke E W 1981) article,
> > > pp. 7 - 24, please take a look these pages.
> > > Unfortunately no plotted figures of these solutions was included.)
> > >
> > > " having an algebraically simplified self-interaction.
> > > (The inclusion of the pseudoscalar term would lead to a more intricate model.)"
> > >
> > > REFERENCE :
> > > Mielke Eckehard W. 1981.
> > > Toward exact solutions of the nonlinear Heisenberg-Pauli-Weyl spinor equation.
> > > Journal of Mathematical Physics, Vol. 22, 2034 (1981).
> > > (This article is also readable from the free preprint pdf:
> > > https://stramings.ictp.it/preprints/P/80/045.pdf
> > > IC/80/45, Internal Report (Limited distribution), 12 double pages, pp.. 1-24.)
> > >
> > > Sorry that I was not able to write equations anymore here.
> > >
> > > Best Regards, Hannu Poropudas, Kolamäentie 9E, 90900 Kiiminki / Oulu, Finland.
> > CORRECTION of free preprint 045.pdf address of Mielke Eckehard W 1981:
> > > REFERENCE :
> > > Mielke Eckehard W. 1981.
> > > Toward exact solutions of the nonlinear Heisenberg-Pauli-Weyl spinor equation.
> > > Journal of Mathematical Physics, Vol. 22, 2034 (1981).
> > > (This article is also readable from the free preprint pdf:
> > > https://stramings.ictp.it/preprints/P/80/045.pdf
> > > IC/80/45, Internal Report (Limited distribution), 12 double pages, pp.. 1-24.)
> > http://streaming.ictp.it/preprints/P/80/045.pdf
> >
> > Hannu
> I found one more recent paper of Mielke E. W. 2017.
> On end of the page 251 (Mieleke E W 2017) mention
> ( I put my clarifications below in parenthesis ):
>
> "[...] The self-interacting potential in (11.4.3),
>
> ( this equation has this above mentioned dropped term
> multiplied arbitary constant a and putting a = 0 in this equation
> gives equation (2.11) in this older reference (Mielke E W 1981) )
>
> , is chosen that a = 0, resulting a radial system of
> equations. In order to solve this in closed form,
> we are postulating a rather special spherically symmetric
> shape for the metric background (11.4.4),
>
> ( = (2.13) in this older paper (Mielke E W 1981))
>
> , which, unfortunately DOES NOT SATISFY
> the field equations of EINSTEIN."
>
> So solutions for this (putting back the dropped term with a = +1)
> in nonlinear Heisenberg-Pauli-Weyl spinor equation
> (1.2) and (2.11) and (2.10), which contain this dropped term, a=+1)
> is still OPEN QUESTION !
>
>
> REFERENCE:
> Mielke Eckehard W. 2017.
> Geometrodynamics of Gauge Fields.
> On the Geometry of Yang-Mills and Gravitational Gauge Fields.
> Mathematical Physics Studies. Second Edition.
> Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017.
> Published by Springer Nature.
> 377 pages,
> pp. 243-250 (11.4.1 Soliton-Type Solutions of the Nonlinear Dirac Equation) and
> pp.251-252 (11.4.2 Mass Spectrum),
> p. 251.
> (This reference is freely downloaded at least in Oulu University public library net,
> with Google search words from https://www.pdfdrive.com)
>
> "Mielke Eckehard W. 2017. Geometrodynamics of Gauge Fields.
> On the Geometry of Yang-Mills and Gravitation Gauge Theories. PDF Drive")
> Best Regards, Hannu Poropudas, Kolamäentie 9E, 90900 Kiiminki / Oulu, Finland.

maanantai 13. maaliskuuta 2023 klo 11.39.57 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> perjantai 10. maaliskuuta 2023 klo 8.15.23 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > torstai 9. maaliskuuta 2023 klo 16.19.46 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > maanantai 27. helmikuuta 2023 klo 11.44.15 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > > keskiviikko 22. helmikuuta 2023 klo 12.17.05 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > > > maanantai 20. helmikuuta 2023 klo 12.36.00 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > > > > lauantai 21. tammikuuta 2023 klo 10.57.48 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > > > > > perjantai 20. tammikuuta 2023 klo 9.25.28 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > > > > > > tiistai 17. tammikuuta 2023 klo 11.32.43 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > > > > > > > tiistai 17. tammikuuta 2023 klo 10.27.35 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > > > > > > > > maanantai 16. tammikuuta 2023 klo 19.42.24 UTC+2 Tom Roberts kirjoitti:
> > > > > > > > > > > On 1/16/23 4:09 AM, Hannu Poropudas wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > If photon rest mass is zero then rest masses of all types of
> > > > > > > > > > > > neutrinos is zero?
> > > > > > > > > > > No.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Neutrinos are observed to oscillate -- they change flavor as they
> > > > > > > > > > > propagate over distance. This is modeled as flavor eigenstates being
> > > > > > > > > > > different from mass eigenstates. That directly implies that at least two
> > > > > > > > > > > neutrino mass eigenstates (out of three) have nonzero mass; it is likely
> > > > > > > > > > > that all three have nonzero mass. Flavor eigenstates do not have a
> > > > > > > > > > > definite mass. Note that flavor eigenstates appear in the Lagrangian and
> > > > > > > > > > > are how interactions occur, while mass eigenstates describe how they
> > > > > > > > > > > propagate over distance.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Tom Roberts
> > > > > > > > > > 1. Deficit in the flux of solar neutrinos observed - YES.
> > > > > > > > > > 2. Deficit in the flux of muon neutrinos in case of atmospheric neutrinos observed - YES.
> > > > > > > > > > 3. Deficit in the flux of reactor electron anti-neutrinos observed - YES.
> > > > > > > > > > 4. Deficit in the flux of particle accelerator beam muon neutrinos observed - YES.
> > > > > > > > > > 5. Deficit in the flux of particle accelerator beam of tau neutrinos observed - YES.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > The claim neutrinos change flavor - NO.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > If I remember right
> > > > > > > > > > (correctness of this my memory picture this should be checked from my old postings)
> > > > > > > > > > that in old H-M's drawing the space-potato particle those neutrinos are always grouped three
> > > > > > > > > > different color neutrinos together ? I don't know what this could mean ?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > New explanations are needed to explain 1.- 4. above ?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I don't understand what is mass eigenstate/s of neutrino/s ?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Could this be something similar that photon has quantum mechanical mass
> > > > > > > > > > m = h*v/c^2, but this is not rest mass of photon which is zero
> > > > > > > > > > (special relativity says that rest mass of photon is m0 = 0 )?
> > > > > > > > > > (h = Plack's constant, v = frequency of light, c = speed of light in vacuum)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Hannu
> > > > > > > > > I found one old posting of mine from sci.physics Google Group.
> > > > > > > > > Here seems to be something about groupings of color wrong neutrinos
> > > > > > > > > and color right neutrinos and color small right neutrinos..
> > > > > > > > > I don't understand what these color groupings mean?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I put COPY of it here below
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Reference:
> > > > > > > > > Hannu Poropudas, 2003.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Re: About Solar Neutrino Problem
> > > > > > > > > sci.physics, Google Groups, Oct 3, 2003, 11:23:15 AM
> > > > > > > > > hannu.p...@osakk.fi's profile photo
> > > > > > > > > hannu.p...@osakk.fi
> > > > > > > > > unread,
> > > > > > > > > Oct 3, 2003, 11:23:15 AM
> > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > basti...@gmx.net (Bastian) wrote in message news:<44d6926c.03100...@posting.google.com>...
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Seems to me you mix up a couple of things. Here an explanation:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > 1) Yes there is an neutrino flux. The fusion processes in the sun
> > > > > > > > > > generate this flux. Without the fusion processes the sun would
> > > > > > > > > > collaps. BUT this neutrino flux
> > > > > > > > > > is emitted isotropically - and of course there is nothing like a
> > > > > > > > > > "center of the space".
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > 2) There are three species of neutrinos (very well known from the
> > > > > > > > > > measurement of the Z^0 -resonance at CERN). There is a small unlikely
> > > > > > > > > > possibility for a 4th generation of very heavy neutrinos (nu-mass >
> > > > > > > > > > Z^0-mass).
> > > > > > > > > > All neutrinos are left-handed. What does it mean? Neutrinos have spin
> > > > > > > > > > (spin 1/2). For massless particles the spin could be aligned or
> > > > > > > > > > anti-aligned with the direction of the movement (actually one would
> > > > > > > > > > rather speak about helicity a which is the spin projection into the
> > > > > > > > > > direction of movement). All neutrinos are anti-aligned. The reason is
> > > > > > > > > > that the weak interaction only produces left-handed neutrinos (why? we
> > > > > > > > > > do not know). There is no possibility to produce them (no interatction
> > > > > > > > > > for this particles) and there is also no possibility to detect them
> > > > > > > > > > directly (again - no interaction). The only way to detect them would
> > > > > > > > > > be to observe a left-handed/right-handed oszillation.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Yes, I understand what you mean. If neutrino has mass then there
> > > > > > > > > exist also corresponding "right-handed neutrino". But I used
> > > > > > > > > words "right neutrino" and "wrong neutrino" which are not
> > > > > > > > > same matter as "left-handed neutrino" and "right-handed neutrino".
> > > > > > > > > Words I used and uou used are possible close each other but some
> > > > > > > > > differences exits that is why different names.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > In H-M's drawings different kind of color electricity interactions
> > > > > > > > > was described (quite mesh because I don't understand this clearly).
> > > > > > > > > I put below some descriptions which I found from my summaries:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 0. "Mass puts different color electricity colors."
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 1. "Three existing neutrinos have two colors: green and violet.
> > > > > > > > > These colors are the two types of electricity in the contracting
> > > > > > > > > Universe. There exist "voltage" in neutrinos that originates
> > > > > > > > > from the contracting Universe."
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Does this above 1. fit also to properties of color magnetic monopoles?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > If this would be true then also
> > > > > > > > color neutrinos are same as color magnetic monopoles
> > > > > > > > as I have earlier guessed in my old postings?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > (Contracting parts of the Universe would be
> > > > > > > > for example inside event horizons of black holes?)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > This "voltage" which originates from contracting parts of the Universe
> > > > > > > > could mean that these color neutrinos have also electric field
> > > > > > > > around them when they move with some velocity v ?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > If this would be true then these color neutrinos interacts
> > > > > > > > with matter also with coupling of their electric field with
> > > > > > > > electric field inside matter through which they penetrate
> > > > > > > > with some velocity v ?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > By the way I have translated (my poor english)
> > > > > > > > finnish word "violetti" to english word "violet"
> > > > > > > > Better translation is to translate finnish "violetti"
> > > > > > > > to english could be "purple" ?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Please take a look on my Hannu Poropudas Facebook public
> > > > > > > > color photographs of those old H-M's old color drawings
> > > > > > > > to see correct english word to those colors?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Best Regards,
> > > > > > > > Hannu Poropudas
> > > > > > > I noticed that I have wrote randomly names of one
> > > > > > > old H-M's color drawing called "Higgsin hiukkaset" (Higgs Particles in english)
> > > > > > > and MY ERROR: I did not ask in due time H-M those correct names and which
> > > > > > > color correspond to which particle when I wrote randomly those names
> > > > > > > on that H-M's drawing (Z0, W+, W- and H0, H+, H-).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I know that names Z0, W+ and W- are correct but I don't know which
> > > > > > > color each of which corresponds.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I think that names H0, H+, H- should
> > > > > > > be rejected due question is certainly not MSSM (=Minimal Supersymmetrical Model)
> > > > > > > Higgs Bosons in this case. Maybe those other three are corresponding particles
> > > > > > > in contracting parts of the Universe ?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Following names remain (Z0, W+, W- and "God Particle").
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I don't know that should additional "Higgs Particle" be called
> > > > > > > "God Particle" due H-M said in due time about that "God Particle" same as
> > > > > > > "Me" when H-M meant herself (I don't understand this at all, except if God
> > > > > > > spoke through H-M similar way as in case of prophets in the Holy Bible) ?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > This old H-M's color drawing "Higgsin hiukkaset" is also
> > > > > > > public in Hannu Poropudas Facebook.
> > > > > > > Best Regards, Hannu Poropudas
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 2. "Wrong neutrinos": Yellow, Orange, Blue, Brown.
> > > > > > > > > Groupings (couplings):
> > > > > > > > > Blue, Orange, Yellow.
> > > > > > > > > Orange, Yellow, Blue.
> > > > > > > > > Brown, Blue, Yellow, Orange.
> > > > > > > > > Blue, Yellow, Orange.
> > > > > > > > > Brown, Yellow, Blue.
> > > > > > > > > "Right neutrinos": (four big ones): Yellow, Blue, Orange, Brown.
> > > > > > > > > (six small ones):
> > > > > > > > > Yellow, Blue, Brown.
> > > > > > > > > Orange, Orange, Blue.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 3. Color electricity flash of lightnings:
> > > > > > > > > Blue, Yellow, Orange, Brown.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 4. Neutrinos have so called "magic" and so called "wonderfulness".
> > > > > > > > > "Magic" is possibly related to dimensions in 10-dimension Universe
> > > > > > > > > (total dimensionality of the Universe which contains our expanding
> > > > > > > > > Universe and this present unknown contracting Universe).
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 5. Exotic "space-potato particle has four different species of
> > > > > > > > > neutrinos
> > > > > > > > > in its structure and neutrinos are always grouped (coupled) three
> > > > > > > > > neutrinos together. "Mirror" structure contains couples of "small
> > > > > > > > > right neutrinos"
> > > > > > > > > and those "hour glass forms" (pre-geomtric form ?, center of which
> > > > > > > > > is that "small neutrino couple" od certain color electricity color
> > > > > > > > > couples).
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 6. 1,2,3,4,5,6 neutrinos groupins (one remark on the H-M's drawing).
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 7. In photon of contracting Universe (one H-M's drawing):
> > > > > > > > > Red and Blue forms a couple.
> > > > > > > > > Green and light Blue is a couple.
> > > > > > > > > Orange and light red is a couple.
> > > > > > > > > Violet and yellow is a couple.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Background blue in the drawing is space blue of empty space which
> > > > > > > > > is no color electricity.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 8. Color circle (in one H-M's drawing):
> > > > > > > > > Yellow periphery and white center and
> > > > > > > > > sectors: green, red, blue, light green, violet, orange.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Green and white are the best "magic colors".
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > -
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > (So I put here allmost all which I found from my article summaries:
> > > > > > > > > Readme_all.txt, Readme_mid.txt and Readme_see.txt )
> > > > > > I put here also important color electricity colors of leptons
> > > > > > (electron, mu-lepton, tau-lepton and 4.th-lepton) from H-M's old drawing
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Electron:
> > > > > > - two colors are used due final color would be bright orange color.
> > > > > > - bright yellow and light red.
> > > > > > -darker red color shine of color electricity spot which is in center of suction spot.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > mu-lepton:
> > > > > > -two colors are used due final color would be King's cloak (="viitta" in finnish) violet (=purple, correct english term).
> > > > > > -light blue and light red.
> > > > > > - darker color shine of color electricity spot which is in center of suction spot.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > tau-lepton:
> > > > > > -one color.
> > > > > > -green.
> > > > > > -darker green color shine of color electricity spot which is in center of suction spot.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 4.th-lepton:
> > > > > > -light brown and gray-brown (this gray-brown color is not suction),
> > > > > > -red-brown (this is not suction and H-M's drawing is looked from above),
> > > > > > - dent (= "lommo" in finnish and H-M's drawing is looked from above),
> > > > > > -4.th-lepton is different than other three leptons above,
> > > > > > but this 4.th-lepton has not much significance for physics.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It is my opinion that we should try to correct our present standard model
> > > > > > of particle physics with these H-M's drawings as "axioms of astrophysics" ?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > These and other H-M's old drawings are public in my Hannu Poropudas Facebook.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best Regards,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hannu Poropudas,
> > > > > > Kolamäentie 9E, 90900 Kiiminki / Oulu, Finland.
> > > > > I forget to say that in H-M's old drawing about black hole there is also drawn this
> > > > > 4.th neutrino, green color electricity color and its shape is
> > > > > strange 4-polygon with four cornes. This color eclectrity 4-polygon was drawn near the tau-neutrino.
> > > > >
> > > > > I forget also mention about above text of mine four leptons that
> > > > > those suction spots which are drawn on the surface above described leptons
> > > > > are interpreted by me such that colorless electric field (our familiar E-field?) originates from them.
> > > > > And from suction spot starts to be formed towards inside of the surface
> > > > > and finally to the center of the surface tornado like
> > > > > color electricity tornado (really form of cone).
> > > > > I have interpreted that suction spot is only one side due the spin (=1/2) of
> > > > > corresponding color electricity neutrino which H-M called long time ago
> > > > > the soul of corresponding lepton.
> > > > >
> > > > > This copy below is due that I think that now it could be possible
> > > > > to correct our present standard model of physics?
> > > > >
> > > > > I put here also in addition important color electricity colors of
> > > > > H-M's old drawings of four quarks and also color electricity colors of proton/neutron:
> > > > >
> > > > > First those four quarks (H-M's old drawing they are 8-polygons,
> > > > > which are in place of color electricity black hole's singularity):
> > > > >
> > > > > 1. -green (and no scratches = "naarmuja" in finnish)
> > > > > 2. -red (two blue scrathes which intersects each others,
> > > > > when one 8/8-single cut diamond has scrathed this quark in its born process).
> > > > > 3. -violet (correct english term for my finnish term violet is purple,
> > > > > two red scrathes which do not intersect each others,
> > > > > two 8/8-single cut diamonds have scrathed this quark in its born process)
> > > > > 4. -yellow (no scrathes).
> > > > >
> > > > > Scrathes are born due stratchings of 8/8-single cut diamods (which I have later
> > > > > called creation stones of the Universe. In H-M's drawing these are two different
> > > > > types of these 8/8-single cut diamonds.)
> > > > >
> > > > > Background color electricity color is not drawn although it should also be there.
> > > > >
> > > > > Background color electricity color is light blue (= empty space's color electricity color
> > > > > which is not color ecltricity.)
> > > > >
> > > > > Proton / Neutron H-M's old drawing:
> > > > >
> > > > > Color cicle is (this is half proton and half neutron for both):
> > > > > 1. -violet (correct english term should be purple), (I have interpreted this weak interaction color),
> > > > > 2. -dark green, (I have interpreted this weak interaction color),
> > > > > 3. - light red, (I have interpreted this strong interaction color),
> > > > > 4. -yellow, (I have interpreted this strong interaction color),
> > > > > 5. -light blue, (I have interpreted this strong interaction color).
> > > > >
> > > > > Proton/Neutron from other side looked:
> > > > >
> > > > > 1. violet (correct english term should be purple) light periphery (="valokehä" in finnish) circle
> > > > > with violet spot in center and center of this spot is small dark violet spot,
> > > > > 2. green light periphery circle
> > > > > with green spot in center and center of this spot is small dark violet spot,
> > > > > 3. light red light periphery circle
> > > > > with light red spot in center and center of this spot is small dark violet spot,
> > > > > 4. light red light periphery circle (check color from H-M's drawing, if light blue is correct?)
> > > > > with light blue spot in center and center of this spot is small dark violet spot,
> > > > > 5. yellow light periphery circle
> > > > > with yellow spot in center and center of this spot is small dark violet spot.
> > > > >
> > > > > I have interpreted those color electricity periphery circles as color electricity gluons
> > > > > (couples of color electricity neutrinos)?
> > > > >
> > > > > Background color is space's dark blue (stars are mark of space's color).
> > > > >
> > > > > Proton is such that one of those five quarks is black (or space's color dark blue?)
> > > > > due mass of proton has changed color electricity color to no color electricity.
> > > > > Combination of four color electricity colors are stable.
> > > > >
> > > > > Neutron is such that as H-M's old explanation said " one day neutron has those five color electricity colors
> > > > > and an second day it has this color electricity structure of proton.
> > > > >
> > > > > So proton and neutron are same particle's two different states as I have interpreted it.
> > > > >
> > > > > Please CHECK those colors from photographs of those original H-M's drawings
> > > > > which are public on my Hannu Poropudas Facebook
> > > > > due I copied these here from my memory pages.
> > > > >
> > > > > Best Regards,
> > > > > Hannu Poropudas
> > > > > Kolamäentie 9E,
> > > > > 90900 Kiiminki / Oulu
> > > > > Finland.
> > > > I put here copies of two old my postings (1994 and 1995) from sci.physics.particle
> > > > due that I think that NOW should be time to think what kind of
> > > > mathematics could be tried in case of H-M's old drawings?
> > > >
> > > > I think that this below Dirac's Nonlinear Equation could be worth to try to
> > > > leptons (electron, mu-lepton, tau-lepton).
> > > >
> > > > Neutrinos (electron-neutrino, mu-lepton neutrino,
> > > > tau-lepton neutrino) have their rest mass = 0, so at least u = 0 in below equation.
> > > > Maybe some additional modifications is still needed in case of neutrinos ?
> > > >
> > > > Some open questions about representation conventions must also be solved first.
> > > > Best Regards, Hannu Poropudas, Kolamäentie 9E, 90900 Kiiminki / Oulu, Finland.
> > > > ----- TWO COPIES BELOW 1. and 2. ------------
> > > > 1.
> > > > Dirac's Nonlinear Equation
> > > > 1 katselukerta
> > > > Tilaa
> > > > Käyttäjän Hannu Poropudas profiilikuva
> > > > Hannu Poropudas
> > > > 30.1.1994 klo 18.55.33
> > > > vastaanottaja
> > > >
> > > > I have here Dirac's Nonlinear Equation:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > k^a (D/Dx^a - C_a)P - l^2 (P_bar k k^b P) k k_b P - uP = 0
> > > >
> > > > where l^2 = 3pi G_F /(h_bar c),
> > > > G_F is Weak interaction's Fermi constant 1.43582*10^-62 Jm^3 (SI-units)
> > > > u = m_0 c /h_bar, P is Dirac's four component spinor wave function,
> > > > a,b = 0,1,2,3.
> > > > C_a is spinor connection coefficients,
> > > > D is ordinary partial derivative.
> > > > k^a = k^0,k^1,k^2,k^3 are Dirac's matrices which depend on space
> > > > time.
> > > >
> > > > Question is now: How would you define k_5 (in Russian way), if
> > > > k = i k_5, where i = (-1)^1/2 and det(g_ij) is determinant of
> > > > metric basic tensor.?
> > > >
> > > > I have one reference: Encyclopedia of Mathematics, vol. 3,
> > > > Kluver Academic Publishers , 1989. This is english translation
> > > > from: Soviet Mathematical Encyclopaedia, Soviet Encyclopaedia
> > > > Publishing House (1977 - 1985), Parts 1-5 + some other later
> > > > parts.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Best Regards,
> > > > Hannu Poropudas
> > > > hapo...@freenet.hut.fi
> > > >
> > > > "Due to the neutrino cages all souls are divided only to two groups..
> > > > Those which can go through them and those which remain in them to
> > > > wait fire expansion stopping of the visible Universe."
> > > >
> > > > ----------------------------------
> > > > 2.
> > > >
> > > > Käyttäjän Hannu Poropudas profiilikuva
> > > > Hannu Poropudas
> > > > lukematon,
> > > > 21.7.1995 klo 10.00.00
> > > > vastaanottaja
> > > >
> > > > I refer here to my posting 'Dirac's Nonlinear Equation',
> > > > <2igoq5$t...@freenet.hut.fi>, which was dated 30 Jan 1994:
> > > >
> > > > I have then a little problem with Russian units and
> > > > I did not got any help then, now I would like to repeat
> > > > the question:
> > > >
> > > > k^a (D/Dx^a - C_a)P - l^2 (P* kk^b P) kk_b P - uP = 0,
> > > >
> > > > where I have modified l^2 constant to be
> > > >
> > > > l^2 = 3pi G_F /(h_bar c), where G_F is weak interaction
> > > > Fermi constant = 1.43582 *10^-62 Jm^3 (in SI-units).
> > > >
> > > > u = m_0 c/h_bar,
> > > >
> > > > h_bar = h/(2pi), h = Planck's constant, pi = 3.14159...,
> > > >
> > > > m_0 is the rest mass of the particle (spin=h_bar/2).
> > > >
> > > > P = Dirac's four component spinor wave function,
> > > >
> > > > a,b = 0,1,2,3,
> > > >
> > > > C_a = Spinor connection coefficients,
> > > >
> > > > D is ordinary partial derivative,
> > > >
> > > > k^a = k^0, k^1, k^2, k^3 are Dirac's matrices, which
> > > > depend on space and time.
> > > >
> > > > (g_ij) is the determinant of metric basic tensor
> > > > (Russian way uses here different signature in flat space-time
> > > > case. In this case g_ij depends on space and time.)
> > > >
> > > > My problem is how to define k = ik_5 properly in
> > > > Russian units or all above in most understandable and
> > > > most easiest SI-units.?
> > > >
> > > > REFERENCE:
> > > >
> > > > Encyclopedia of Mathematics, 1989.
> > > > Vol.3, Cluver Academic Publishers.
> > > > (Transl. Soviet Mathematical Encyclopaedia,
> > > > Soviet Encyclopaedia Publishing House, 1977-1985-?,
> > > > Parts 1-10.)
> > > >
> > > > ---
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Best Regards,
> > > >
> > > > Hannu Poropudas.
> > > >
> > > > "It's Not What You Know That Matters
> > > > ... It's Knowing What You Don't."
> > > > -----------------------------------------------
> > >
> > > CORRECTION
> > >
> > > P_bar or P* are wrong markings of complex conjugate of P
> > > in above old postings of mine.
> > >
> > > -----
> > > REMARK (important):
> > >
> > > I found one interesting article about approximate exact colorless solution
> > > which used characterictic dimensions l* for strong gravity hypothesis
> > > l* = (8*Pi*h_bar*G_s/c^3)^(1/2) = approximately 10^(-13) cm, (1.11).
> > > (l* = l and e=+1 in later text of (Mielke E W 1981) )
> > >
> > > (In my old postings this would be replaced by l* = l, where
> > >
> > > l^2 = 3pi G_F /(h_bar c),
> > >
> > > G_F is Weak interaction's Fermi constant 1.43582*10^-62 Jm^3 (SI-units).
> > > And same Mielke E W radial solution would be used but now with different l.
> > >
> > > And now instead of quarks there are colorless leptons in question in this radial
> > > approximate exact solution.
> > > And colorless neutrinos case is modified perhaps little differently?)
> > >
> > > (Definition of Phi, which was in my old postings called as P is (1.3 on page 2).)
> > > (Definitions of Mielke are (1.1)-(1.3) and (2.1) - (2.9))
> > >
> > > Melke (Mielke E W 1981) used little different definitions for naming and
> > > different notations than what I used in those above old postings of mine.
> > >
> > > So these definitions and markings of (Mielke E W 1981) are used now
> > > and you have to look all equations reference mentioned in this preprint article,
> > > which has Mielke's hand written equations)
> > >
> > > Approximation was explained on pages 6 - 7 (I put explanation of this approximation below copy "...").
> > > in Lagrangian densitty (2.1) on page 5 and page 6 - 7
> > >
> > > "According to well-known relations between scalar products of bilinear forms
> > > containing identical spinors the self-interaction in (2.1), which is of the axial-vector-type,
> > > may be replaced by a scalar-minus-a-pseudoscalar-type self-coupling, i.e.,
> > > (2.10) equations on page 6."
> > >
> > > (Approximation was such that this last pseudo-scalar term was dopped away.)
> > >
> > > "Therefore it is justified to a certain extent to consider instead of (1.2) on page 2"
> > >
> > > (Which I have called on my old postings nonlinear Dirac's equation.)
> > >
> > > "Therefore it is justified to certain extent to consider instead of (1.2) on page 2 the
> > > nonlinear Dirac equation (2.11) on page 6"
> > >
> > > (radial part of which (2.11) is solved exactly in (Mieleke E W 1981) article,
> > > pp. 7 - 24, please take a look these pages.
> > > Unfortunately no plotted figures of these solutions was included.)
> > >
> > > " having an algebraically simplified self-interaction.
> > > (The inclusion of the pseudoscalar term would lead to a more intricate model.)"
> > >
> > > REFERENCE :
> > > Mielke Eckehard W. 1981.
> > > Toward exact solutions of the nonlinear Heisenberg-Pauli-Weyl spinor equation.
> > > Journal of Mathematical Physics, Vol. 22, 2034 (1981).
> > > (This article is also readable from the free preprint pdf:
> > > https://stramings.ictp.it/preprints/P/80/045.pdf
> > > IC/80/45, Internal Report (Limited distribution), 12 double pages, pp.. 1-24.)
> > >
> > > Sorry that I was not able to write equations anymore here.
> > >
> > > Best Regards, Hannu Poropudas, Kolamäentie 9E, 90900 Kiiminki / Oulu, Finland.
> > CORRECTION of free preprint 045.pdf address of Mielke Eckehard W 1981:
> > > REFERENCE :
> > > Mielke Eckehard W. 1981.
> > > Toward exact solutions of the nonlinear Heisenberg-Pauli-Weyl spinor equation.
> > > Journal of Mathematical Physics, Vol. 22, 2034 (1981).
> > > (This article is also readable from the free preprint pdf:
> > > https://stramings.ictp.it/preprints/P/80/045.pdf
> > > IC/80/45, Internal Report (Limited distribution), 12 double pages, pp.. 1-24.)
> > http://streaming.ictp.it/preprints/P/80/045.pdf
> >
> > Hannu
> I found one more recent paper of Mielke E. W. 2017.
> On end of the page 251 (Mieleke E W 2017) mention
> ( I put my clarifications below in parenthesis ):
>
> "[...] The self-interacting potential in (11.4.3),
>
> ( this equation has this above mentioned dropped term
> multiplied arbitary constant a and putting a = 0 in this equation
> gives equation (2.11) in this older reference (Mielke E W 1981) )
>
> , is chosen that a = 0, resulting a radial system of
> equations. In order to solve this in closed form,
> we are postulating a rather special spherically symmetric
> shape for the metric background (11.4.4),
>
> ( = (2.13) in this older paper (Mielke E W 1981))
>
> , which, unfortunately DOES NOT SATISFY
> the field equations of EINSTEIN."
>
> So solutions for this (putting back the dropped term with a = +1)
> in nonlinear Heisenberg-Pauli-Weyl spinor equation
> (1.2) and (2.11) and (2.10), which contain this dropped term, a=+1)
> is still OPEN QUESTION !
>
>
> REFERENCE:
> Mielke Eckehard W. 2017.
> Geometrodynamics of Gauge Fields.
> On the Geometry of Yang-Mills and Gravitational Gauge Fields.
> Mathematical Physics Studies. Second Edition.
> Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017.
> Published by Springer Nature.
> 377 pages,
> pp. 243-250 (11.4.1 Soliton-Type Solutions of the Nonlinear Dirac Equation) and
> pp.251-252 (11.4.2 Mass Spectrum),
> p. 251.
> (This reference is freely downloaded at least in Oulu University public library net,
> with Google search words from https://www.pdfdrive.com)
>
> "Mielke Eckehard W. 2017. Geometrodynamics of Gauge Fields.
> On the Geometry of Yang-Mills and Gravitation Gauge Theories. PDF Drive")
> Best Regards, Hannu Poropudas, Kolamäentie 9E, 90900 Kiiminki / Oulu, Finland.

tiistai 14. maaliskuuta 2023 klo 10.07.36 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> maanantai 13. maaliskuuta 2023 klo 11.39.57 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > perjantai 10. maaliskuuta 2023 klo 8.15.23 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > torstai 9. maaliskuuta 2023 klo 16.19.46 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > > maanantai 27. helmikuuta 2023 klo 11.44.15 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > > > keskiviikko 22. helmikuuta 2023 klo 12.17.05 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > > > > maanantai 20. helmikuuta 2023 klo 12.36.00 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > > > > > lauantai 21. tammikuuta 2023 klo 10.57.48 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > > > > > > perjantai 20. tammikuuta 2023 klo 9.25.28 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > > > > > > > tiistai 17. tammikuuta 2023 klo 11.32.43 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > > > > > > > > tiistai 17. tammikuuta 2023 klo 10.27.35 UTC+2 Hannu Poropudas kirjoitti:
> > > > > > > > > > > maanantai 16. tammikuuta 2023 klo 19.42.24 UTC+2 Tom Roberts kirjoitti:
> > > > > > > > > > > > On 1/16/23 4:09 AM, Hannu Poropudas wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > If photon rest mass is zero then rest masses of all types of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > neutrinos is zero?
> > > > > > > > > > > > No.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Neutrinos are observed to oscillate -- they change flavor as they
> > > > > > > > > > > > propagate over distance. This is modeled as flavor eigenstates being
> > > > > > > > > > > > different from mass eigenstates. That directly implies that at least two
> > > > > > > > > > > > neutrino mass eigenstates (out of three) have nonzero mass; it is likely
> > > > > > > > > > > > that all three have nonzero mass. Flavor eigenstates do not have a
> > > > > > > > > > > > definite mass. Note that flavor eigenstates appear in the Lagrangian and
> > > > > > > > > > > > are how interactions occur, while mass eigenstates describe how they
> > > > > > > > > > > > propagate over distance.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Tom Roberts
> > > > > > > > > > > 1. Deficit in the flux of solar neutrinos observed - YES.
> > > > > > > > > > > 2. Deficit in the flux of muon neutrinos in case of atmospheric neutrinos observed - YES.
> > > > > > > > > > > 3. Deficit in the flux of reactor electron anti-neutrinos observed - YES.
> > > > > > > > > > > 4. Deficit in the flux of particle accelerator beam muon neutrinos observed - YES.
> > > > > > > > > > > 5. Deficit in the flux of particle accelerator beam of tau neutrinos observed - YES.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > The claim neutrinos change flavor - NO.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > If I remember right
> > > > > > > > > > > (correctness of this my memory picture this should be checked from my old postings)
> > > > > > > > > > > that in old H-M's drawing the space-potato particle those neutrinos are always grouped three
> > > > > > > > > > > different color neutrinos together ? I don't know what this could mean ?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > New explanations are needed to explain 1.- 4. above ?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I don't understand what is mass eigenstate/s of neutrino/s ?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Could this be something similar that photon has quantum mechanical mass
> > > > > > > > > > > m = h*v/c^2, but this is not rest mass of photon which is zero
> > > > > > > > > > > (special relativity says that rest mass of photon is m0 = 0 )?
> > > > > > > > > > > (h = Plack's constant, v = frequency of light, c = speed of light in vacuum)
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Hannu
> > > > > > > > > > I found one old posting of mine from sci.physics Google Group.
> > > > > > > > > > Here seems to be something about groupings of color wrong neutrinos
> > > > > > > > > > and color right neutrinos and color small right neutrinos.
> > > > > > > > > > I don't understand what these color groupings mean?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I put COPY of it here below
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Reference:
> > > > > > > > > > Hannu Poropudas, 2003.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Re: About Solar Neutrino Problem
> > > > > > > > > > sci.physics, Google Groups, Oct 3, 2003, 11:23:15 AM
> > > > > > > > > > hannu.p...@osakk.fi's profile photo
> > > > > > > > > > hannu.p...@osakk.fi
> > > > > > > > > > unread,
> > > > > > > > > > Oct 3, 2003, 11:23:15 AM
> > > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > basti...@gmx.net (Bastian) wrote in message news:<44d6926c.03100...@posting.google.com>...
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Seems to me you mix up a couple of things. Here an explanation:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > 1) Yes there is an neutrino flux. The fusion processes in the sun
> > > > > > > > > > > generate this flux. Without the fusion processes the sun would
> > > > > > > > > > > collaps. BUT this neutrino flux
> > > > > > > > > > > is emitted isotropically - and of course there is nothing like a
> > > > > > > > > > > "center of the space".
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > 2) There are three species of neutrinos (very well known from the
> > > > > > > > > > > measurement of the Z^0 -resonance at CERN). There is a small unlikely
> > > > > > > > > > > possibility for a 4th generation of very heavy neutrinos (nu-mass >
> > > > > > > > > > > Z^0-mass).
> > > > > > > > > > > All neutrinos are left-handed. What does it mean? Neutrinos have spin
> > > > > > > > > > > (spin 1/2). For massless particles the spin could be aligned or
> > > > > > > > > > > anti-aligned with the direction of the movement (actually one would
> > > > > > > > > > > rather speak about helicity a which is the spin projection into the
> > > > > > > > > > > direction of movement). All neutrinos are anti-aligned. The reason is
> > > > > > > > > > > that the weak interaction only produces left-handed neutrinos (why? we
> > > > > > > > > > > do not know). There is no possibility to produce them (no interatction
> > > > > > > > > > > for this particles) and there is also no possibility to detect them
> > > > > > > > > > > directly (again - no interaction). The only way to detect them would
> > > > > > > > > > > be to observe a left-handed/right-handed oszillation.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Yes, I understand what you mean. If neutrino has mass then there
> > > > > > > > > > exist also corresponding "right-handed neutrino". But I used
> > > > > > > > > > words "right neutrino" and "wrong neutrino" which are not
> > > > > > > > > > same matter as "left-handed neutrino" and "right-handed neutrino".
> > > > > > > > > > Words I used and uou used are possible close each other but some
> > > > > > > > > > differences exits that is why different names.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > In H-M's drawings different kind of color electricity interactions
> > > > > > > > > > was described (quite mesh because I don't understand this clearly).
> > > > > > > > > > I put below some descriptions which I found from my summaries:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > 0. "Mass puts different color electricity colors."
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > 1. "Three existing neutrinos have two colors: green and violet.
> > > > > > > > > > These colors are the two types of electricity in the contracting
> > > > > > > > > > Universe. There exist "voltage" in neutrinos that originates
> > > > > > > > > > from the contracting Universe."
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Does this above 1. fit also to properties of color magnetic monopoles?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > If this would be true then also
> > > > > > > > > color neutrinos are same as color magnetic monopoles
> > > > > > > > > as I have earlier guessed in my old postings?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > (Contracting parts of the Universe would be
> > > > > > > > > for example inside event horizons of black holes?)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > This "voltage" which originates from contracting parts of the Universe
> > > > > > > > > could mean that these color neutrinos have also electric field
> > > > > > > > > around them when they move with some velocity v ?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > If this would be true then these color neutrinos interacts
> > > > > > > > > with matter also with coupling of their electric field with
> > > > > > > > > electric field inside matter through which they penetrate
> > > > > > > > > with some velocity v ?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > By the way I have translated (my poor english)
> > > > > > > > > finnish word "violetti" to english word "violet"
> > > > > > > > > Better translation is to translate finnish "violetti"
> > > > > > > > > to english could be "purple" ?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Please take a look on my Hannu Poropudas Facebook public
> > > > > > > > > color photographs of those old H-M's old color drawings
> > > > > > > > > to see correct english word to those colors?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Best Regards,
> > > > > > > > > Hannu Poropudas
> > > > > > > > I noticed that I have wrote randomly names of one
> > > > > > > > old H-M's color drawing called "Higgsin hiukkaset" (Higgs Particles in english)
> > > > > > > > and MY ERROR: I did not ask in due time H-M those correct names and which
> > > > > > > > color correspond to which particle when I wrote randomly those names
> > > > > > > > on that H-M's drawing (Z0, W+, W- and H0, H+, H-).
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I know that names Z0, W+ and W- are correct but I don't know which
> > > > > > > > color each of which corresponds.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I think that names H0, H+, H- should
> > > > > > > > be rejected due question is certainly not MSSM (=Minimal Supersymmetrical Model)
> > > > > > > > Higgs Bosons in this case. Maybe those other three are corresponding particles
> > > > > > > > in contracting parts of the Universe ?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Following names remain (Z0, W+, W- and "God Particle").
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I don't know that should additional "Higgs Particle" be called
> > > > > > > > "God Particle" due H-M said in due time about that "God Particle" same as
> > > > > > > > "Me" when H-M meant herself (I don't understand this at all, except if God
> > > > > > > > spoke through H-M similar way as in case of prophets in the Holy Bible) ?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > This old H-M's color drawing "Higgsin hiukkaset" is also
> > > > > > > > public in Hannu Poropudas Facebook.
> > > > > > > > Best Regards, Hannu Poropudas
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > 2. "Wrong neutrinos": Yellow, Orange, Blue, Brown.
> > > > > > > > > > Groupings (couplings):
> > > > > > > > > > Blue, Orange, Yellow.
> > > > > > > > > > Orange, Yellow, Blue.
> > > > > > > > > > Brown, Blue, Yellow, Orange.
> > > > > > > > > > Blue, Yellow, Orange.
> > > > > > > > > > Brown, Yellow, Blue.
> > > > > > > > > > "Right neutrinos": (four big ones): Yellow, Blue, Orange, Brown.
> > > > > > > > > > (six small ones):
> > > > > > > > > > Yellow, Blue, Brown.
> > > > > > > > > > Orange, Orange, Blue.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > 3. Color electricity flash of lightnings:
> > > > > > > > > > Blue, Yellow, Orange, Brown.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > 4. Neutrinos have so called "magic" and so called "wonderfulness".
> > > > > > > > > > "Magic" is possibly related to dimensions in 10-dimension Universe
> > > > > > > > > > (total dimensionality of the Universe which contains our expanding
> > > > > > > > > > Universe and this present unknown contracting Universe)..
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > 5. Exotic "space-potato particle has four different species of
> > > > > > > > > > neutrinos
> > > > > > > > > > in its structure and neutrinos are always grouped (coupled) three
> > > > > > > > > > neutrinos together. "Mirror" structure contains couples of "small
> > > > > > > > > > right neutrinos"
> > > > > > > > > > and those "hour glass forms" (pre-geomtric form ?, center of which
> > > > > > > > > > is that "small neutrino couple" od certain color electricity color
> > > > > > > > > > couples).
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > 6. 1,2,3,4,5,6 neutrinos groupins (one remark on the H-M's drawing).
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > 7. In photon of contracting Universe (one H-M's drawing):
> > > > > > > > > > Red and Blue forms a couple.
> > > > > > > > > > Green and light Blue is a couple.
> > > > > > > > > > Orange and light red is a couple.
> > > > > > > > > > Violet and yellow is a couple.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Background blue in the drawing is space blue of empty space which
> > > > > > > > > > is no color electricity.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > 8. Color circle (in one H-M's drawing):
> > > > > > > > > > Yellow periphery and white center and
> > > > > > > > > > sectors: green, red, blue, light green, violet, orange.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Green and white are the best "magic colors".
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > -
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > (So I put here allmost all which I found from my article summaries:
> > > > > > > > > > Readme_all.txt, Readme_mid.txt and Readme_see.txt )
> > > > > > > I put here also important color electricity colors of leptons
> > > > > > > (electron, mu-lepton, tau-lepton and 4.th-lepton) from H-M's old drawing
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Electron:
> > > > > > > - two colors are used due final color would be bright orange color.
> > > > > > > - bright yellow and light red.
> > > > > > > -darker red color shine of color electricity spot which is in center of suction spot.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > mu-lepton:
> > > > > > > -two colors are used due final color would be King's cloak (="viitta" in finnish) violet (=purple, correct english term).
> > > > > > > -light blue and light red.
> > > > > > > - darker color shine of color electricity spot which is in center of suction spot.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > tau-lepton:
> > > > > > > -one color.
> > > > > > > -green.
> > > > > > > -darker green color shine of color electricity spot which is in center of suction spot.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 4.th-lepton:
> > > > > > > -light brown and gray-brown (this gray-brown color is not suction),
> > > > > > > -red-brown (this is not suction and H-M's drawing is looked from above),
> > > > > > > - dent (= "lommo" in finnish and H-M's drawing is looked from above),
> > > > > > > -4.th-lepton is different than other three leptons above,
> > > > > > > but this 4.th-lepton has not much significance for physics.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It is my opinion that we should try to correct our present standard model
> > > > > > > of particle physics with these H-M's drawings as "axioms of astrophysics" ?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > These and other H-M's old drawings are public in my Hannu Poropudas Facebook.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Best Regards,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hannu Poropudas,
> > > > > > > Kolamäentie 9E, 90900 Kiiminki / Oulu, Finland.
> > > > > > I forget to say that in H-M's old drawing about black hole there is also drawn this
> > > > > > 4.th neutrino, green color electricity color and its shape is
> > > > > > strange 4-polygon with four cornes. This color eclectrity 4-polygon was drawn near the tau-neutrino.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I forget also mention about above text of mine four leptons that
> > > > > > those suction spots which are drawn on the surface above described leptons
> > > > > > are interpreted by me such that colorless electric field (our familiar E-field?) originates from them.
> > > > > > And from suction spot starts to be formed towards inside of the surface
> > > > > > and finally to the center of the surface tornado like
> > > > > > color electricity tornado (really form of cone).
> > > > > > I have interpreted that suction spot is only one side due the spin (=1/2) of
> > > > > > corresponding color electricity neutrino which H-M called long time ago
> > > > > > the soul of corresponding lepton.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This copy below is due that I think that now it could be possible
> > > > > > to correct our present standard model of physics?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I put here also in addition important color electricity colors of
> > > > > > H-M's old drawings of four quarks and also color electricity colors of proton/neutron:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > First those four quarks (H-M's old drawing they are 8-polygons,
> > > > > > which are in place of color electricity black hole's singularity):
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1. -green (and no scratches = "naarmuja" in finnish)
> > > > > > 2. -red (two blue scrathes which intersects each others,
> > > > > > when one 8/8-single cut diamond has scrathed this quark in its born process).
> > > > > > 3. -violet (correct english term for my finnish term violet is purple,
> > > > > > two red scrathes which do not intersect each others,
> > > > > > two 8/8-single cut diamonds have scrathed this quark in its born process)
> > > > > > 4. -yellow (no scrathes).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Scrathes are born due stratchings of 8/8-single cut diamods (which I have later
> > > > > > called creation stones of the Universe. In H-M's drawing these are two different
> > > > > > types of these 8/8-single cut diamonds.)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Background color electricity color is not drawn although it should also be there.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Background color electricity color is light blue (= empty space's color electricity color
> > > > > > which is not color ecltricity.)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Proton / Neutron H-M's old drawing:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Color cicle is (this is half proton and half neutron for both):
> > > > > > 1. -violet (correct english term should be purple), (I have interpreted this weak interaction color),
> > > > > > 2. -dark green, (I have interpreted this weak interaction color),
> > > > > > 3. - light red, (I have interpreted this strong interaction color),
> > > > > > 4. -yellow, (I have interpreted this strong interaction color),
> > > > > > 5. -light blue, (I have interpreted this strong interaction color).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Proton/Neutron from other side looked:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1. violet (correct english term should be purple) light periphery (="valokehä" in finnish) circle
> > > > > > with violet spot in center and center of this spot is small dark violet spot,
> > > > > > 2. green light periphery circle
> > > > > > with green spot in center and center of this spot is small dark violet spot,
> > > > > > 3. light red light periphery circle
> > > > > > with light red spot in center and center of this spot is small dark violet spot,
> > > > > > 4. light red light periphery circle (check color from H-M's drawing, if light blue is correct?)
> > > > > > with light blue spot in center and center of this spot is small dark violet spot,
> > > > > > 5. yellow light periphery circle
> > > > > > with yellow spot in center and center of this spot is small dark violet spot.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have interpreted those color electricity periphery circles as color electricity gluons
> > > > > > (couples of color electricity neutrinos)?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Background color is space's dark blue (stars are mark of space's color).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Proton is such that one of those five quarks is black (or space's color dark blue?)
> > > > > > due mass of proton has changed color electricity color to no color electricity.
> > > > > > Combination of four color electricity colors are stable.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Neutron is such that as H-M's old explanation said " one day neutron has those five color electricity colors
> > > > > > and an second day it has this color electricity structure of proton.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So proton and neutron are same particle's two different states as I have interpreted it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Please CHECK those colors from photographs of those original H-M's drawings
> > > > > > which are public on my Hannu Poropudas Facebook
> > > > > > due I copied these here from my memory pages.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best Regards,
> > > > > > Hannu Poropudas
> > > > > > Kolamäentie 9E,
> > > > > > 90900 Kiiminki / Oulu
> > > > > > Finland.
> > > > > I put here copies of two old my postings (1994 and 1995) from sci..physics.particle
> > > > > due that I think that NOW should be time to think what kind of
> > > > > mathematics could be tried in case of H-M's old drawings?
> > > > >
> > > > > I think that this below Dirac's Nonlinear Equation could be worth to try to
> > > > > leptons (electron, mu-lepton, tau-lepton).
> > > > >
> > > > > Neutrinos (electron-neutrino, mu-lepton neutrino,
> > > > > tau-lepton neutrino) have their rest mass = 0, so at least u = 0 in below equation.
> > > > > Maybe some additional modifications is still needed in case of neutrinos ?
> > > > >
> > > > > Some open questions about representation conventions must also be solved first.
> > > > > Best Regards, Hannu Poropudas, Kolamäentie 9E, 90900 Kiiminki / Oulu, Finland.
> > > > > ----- TWO COPIES BELOW 1. and 2. ------------
> > > > > 1.
> > > > > Dirac's Nonlinear Equation
> > > > > 1 katselukerta
> > > > > Tilaa
> > > > > Käyttäjän Hannu Poropudas profiilikuva
> > > > > Hannu Poropudas
> > > > > 30.1.1994 klo 18.55.33
> > > > > vastaanottaja
> > > > >
> > > > > I have here Dirac's Nonlinear Equation:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > k^a (D/Dx^a - C_a)P - l^2 (P_bar k k^b P) k k_b P - uP = 0
> > > > >
> > > > > where l^2 = 3pi G_F /(h_bar c),
> > > > > G_F is Weak interaction's Fermi constant 1.43582*10^-62 Jm^3 (SI-units)
> > > > > u = m_0 c /h_bar, P is Dirac's four component spinor wave function,
> > > > > a,b = 0,1,2,3.
> > > > > C_a is spinor connection coefficients,
> > > > > D is ordinary partial derivative.
> > > > > k^a = k^0,k^1,k^2,k^3 are Dirac's matrices which depend on space
> > > > > time.
> > > > >
> > > > > Question is now: How would you define k_5 (in Russian way), if
> > > > > k = i k_5, where i = (-1)^1/2 and det(g_ij) is determinant of
> > > > > metric basic tensor.?
> > > > >
> > > > > I have one reference: Encyclopedia of Mathematics, vol. 3,
> > > > > Kluver Academic Publishers , 1989. This is english translation
> > > > > from: Soviet Mathematical Encyclopaedia, Soviet Encyclopaedia
> > > > > Publishing House (1977 - 1985), Parts 1-5 + some other later
> > > > > parts.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Best Regards,
> > > > > Hannu Poropudas
> > > > > hapo...@freenet.hut.fi
> > > > >
> > > > > "Due to the neutrino cages all souls are divided only to two groups.
> > > > > Those which can go through them and those which remain in them to
> > > > > wait fire expansion stopping of the visible Universe."
> > > > >
> > > > > ----------------------------------
> > > > > 2.
> > > > >
> > > > > Käyttäjän Hannu Poropudas profiilikuva
> > > > > Hannu Poropudas
> > > > > lukematon,
> > > > > 21.7.1995 klo 10.00.00
> > > > > vastaanottaja
> > > > >
> > > > > I refer here to my posting 'Dirac's Nonlinear Equation',
> > > > > <2igoq5$t...@freenet.hut.fi>, which was dated 30 Jan 1994:
> > > > >
> > > > > I have then a little problem with Russian units and
> > > > > I did not got any help then, now I would like to repeat
> > > > > the question:
> > > > >
> > > > > k^a (D/Dx^a - C_a)P - l^2 (P* kk^b P) kk_b P - uP = 0,
> > > > >
> > > > > where I have modified l^2 constant to be
> > > > >
> > > > > l^2 = 3pi G_F /(h_bar c), where G_F is weak interaction
> > > > > Fermi constant = 1.43582 *10^-62 Jm^3 (in SI-units).
> > > > >
> > > > > u = m_0 c/h_bar,
> > > > >
> > > > > h_bar = h/(2pi), h = Planck's constant, pi = 3.14159...,
> > > > >
> > > > > m_0 is the rest mass of the particle (spin=h_bar/2).
> > > > >
> > > > > P = Dirac's four component spinor wave function,
> > > > >
> > > > > a,b = 0,1,2,3,
> > > > >
> > > > > C_a = Spinor connection coefficients,
> > > > >
> > > > > D is ordinary partial derivative,
> > > > >
> > > > > k^a = k^0, k^1, k^2, k^3 are Dirac's matrices, which
> > > > > depend on space and time.
> > > > >
> > > > > (g_ij) is the determinant of metric basic tensor
> > > > > (Russian way uses here different signature in flat space-time
> > > > > case. In this case g_ij depends on space and time.)
> > > > >
> > > > > My problem is how to define k = ik_5 properly in
> > > > > Russian units or all above in most understandable and
> > > > > most easiest SI-units.?
> > > > >
> > > > > REFERENCE:
> > > > >
> > > > > Encyclopedia of Mathematics, 1989.
> > > > > Vol.3, Cluver Academic Publishers.
> > > > > (Transl. Soviet Mathematical Encyclopaedia,
> > > > > Soviet Encyclopaedia Publishing House, 1977-1985-?,
> > > > > Parts 1-10.)
> > > > >
> > > > > ---
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Best Regards,
> > > > >
> > > > > Hannu Poropudas.
> > > > >
> > > > > "It's Not What You Know That Matters
> > > > > ... It's Knowing What You Don't."
> > > > > -----------------------------------------------
> > > >
> > > > CORRECTION
> > > >
> > > > P_bar or P* are wrong markings of complex conjugate of P
> > > > in above old postings of mine.
> > > >
> > > > -----
> > > > REMARK (important):
> > > >
> > > > I found one interesting article about approximate exact colorless solution
> > > > which used characterictic dimensions l* for strong gravity hypothesis
> > > > l* = (8*Pi*h_bar*G_s/c^3)^(1/2) = approximately 10^(-13) cm, (1..11).
> > > > (l* = l and e=+1 in later text of (Mielke E W 1981) )
> > > >
> > > > (In my old postings this would be replaced by l* = l, where
> > > >
> > > > l^2 = 3pi G_F /(h_bar c),
> > > >
> > > > G_F is Weak interaction's Fermi constant 1.43582*10^-62 Jm^3 (SI-units).
> > > > And same Mielke E W radial solution would be used but now with different l.
> > > >
> > > > And now instead of quarks there are colorless leptons in question in this radial
> > > > approximate exact solution.
> > > > And colorless neutrinos case is modified perhaps little differently?)
> > > >
> > > > (Definition of Phi, which was in my old postings called as P is (1.3 on page 2).)
> > > > (Definitions of Mielke are (1.1)-(1.3) and (2.1) - (2.9))
> > > >
> > > > Melke (Mielke E W 1981) used little different definitions for naming and
> > > > different notations than what I used in those above old postings of mine.
> > > >
> > > > So these definitions and markings of (Mielke E W 1981) are used now
> > > > and you have to look all equations reference mentioned in this preprint article,
> > > > which has Mielke's hand written equations)
> > > >
> > > > Approximation was explained on pages 6 - 7 (I put explanation of this approximation below copy "...").
> > > > in Lagrangian densitty (2.1) on page 5 and page 6 - 7
> > > >
> > > > "According to well-known relations between scalar products of bilinear forms
> > > > containing identical spinors the self-interaction in (2.1), which is of the axial-vector-type,
> > > > may be replaced by a scalar-minus-a-pseudoscalar-type self-coupling, i.e.,
> > > > (2.10) equations on page 6."
> > > >
> > > > (Approximation was such that this last pseudo-scalar term was dopped away.)
> > > >
> > > > "Therefore it is justified to a certain extent to consider instead of (1.2) on page 2"
> > > >
> > > > (Which I have called on my old postings nonlinear Dirac's equation.)
> > > >
> > > > "Therefore it is justified to certain extent to consider instead of (1.2) on page 2 the
> > > > nonlinear Dirac equation (2.11) on page 6"
> > > >
> > > > (radial part of which (2.11) is solved exactly in (Mieleke E W 1981) article,
> > > > pp. 7 - 24, please take a look these pages.
> > > > Unfortunately no plotted figures of these solutions was included.)
> > > >
> > > > " having an algebraically simplified self-interaction.
> > > > (The inclusion of the pseudoscalar term would lead to a more intricate model.)"
> > > >
> > > > REFERENCE :
> > > > Mielke Eckehard W. 1981.
> > > > Toward exact solutions of the nonlinear Heisenberg-Pauli-Weyl spinor equation.
> > > > Journal of Mathematical Physics, Vol. 22, 2034 (1981).
> > > > (This article is also readable from the free preprint pdf:
> > > > https://stramings.ictp.it/preprints/P/80/045.pdf
> > > > IC/80/45, Internal Report (Limited distribution), 12 double pages, pp. 1-24.)
> > > >
> > > > Sorry that I was not able to write equations anymore here.
> > > >
> > > > Best Regards, Hannu Poropudas, Kolamäentie 9E, 90900 Kiiminki / Oulu, Finland.
> > > CORRECTION of free preprint 045.pdf address of Mielke Eckehard W 1981:
> > > > REFERENCE :
> > > > Mielke Eckehard W. 1981.
> > > > Toward exact solutions of the nonlinear Heisenberg-Pauli-Weyl spinor equation.
> > > > Journal of Mathematical Physics, Vol. 22, 2034 (1981).
> > > > (This article is also readable from the free preprint pdf:
> > > > https://stramings.ictp.it/preprints/P/80/045.pdf
> > > > IC/80/45, Internal Report (Limited distribution), 12 double pages, pp. 1-24.)
> > > http://streaming.ictp.it/preprints/P/80/045.pdf
> > >
> > > Hannu
> > I found one more recent paper of Mielke E. W. 2017.
> > On end of the page 251 (Mieleke E W 2017) mention
> > ( I put my clarifications below in parenthesis ):
> >
> > "[...] The self-interacting potential in (11.4.3),
> >
> > ( this equation has this above mentioned dropped term
> > multiplied arbitary constant a and putting a = 0 in this equation
> > gives equation (2.11) in this older reference (Mielke E W 1981) )
> >
> > , is chosen that a = 0, resulting a radial system of
> > equations. In order to solve this in closed form,
> > we are postulating a rather special spherically symmetric
> > shape for the metric background (11.4.4),
> >
> > ( = (2.13) in this older paper (Mielke E W 1981))
> >
> > , which, unfortunately DOES NOT SATISFY
> > the field equations of EINSTEIN."
> >
> > So solutions for this (putting back the dropped term with a = +1)
> > in nonlinear Heisenberg-Pauli-Weyl spinor equation
> > (1.2) and (2.11) and (2.10), which contain this dropped term, a=+1)
> > is still OPEN QUESTION !
> >
> >
> > REFERENCE:
> > Mielke Eckehard W. 2017.
> > Geometrodynamics of Gauge Fields.
> > On the Geometry of Yang-Mills and Gravitational Gauge Fields.
> > Mathematical Physics Studies. Second Edition.
> > Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017.
> > Published by Springer Nature.
> > 377 pages,
> > pp. 243-250 (11.4.1 Soliton-Type Solutions of the Nonlinear Dirac Equation) and
> > pp.251-252 (11.4.2 Mass Spectrum),
> > p. 251.
> > (This reference is freely downloaded at least in Oulu University public library net,
> > with Google search words from https://www.pdfdrive.com)
> >
> > "Mielke Eckehard W. 2017. Geometrodynamics of Gauge Fields.
> > On the Geometry of Yang-Mills and Gravitation Gauge Theories. PDF Drive")
> > Best Regards, Hannu Poropudas, Kolamäentie 9E, 90900 Kiiminki / Oulu, Finland.
> I found one interesting article to be read from references of (Mielke Eckehard W. 2017).
> Here is Heisenberg-Pauli-Weyl equation (1.2) and Einstein equation is (1.4),
> and Heisenberg-Klein-Gordon equation is (2.6) which is formally similar than
> "squaring" the fundamental spinor equation (1.2), etc...
>
> Let us try to read this interesting article, if it could have something to teach for us ?
>
> REFERENCE:
> Mielke Eckenhard W., Scherzer Reinhard, 1981.
> Geon-type solutions of the nonlinear Heisenberg-Klein-Gordon equation.
> Physical Review D, Volume 24, Number 8, 15 October 1981.
> 16 pages.
> (This is also public readable (at least in Oulu Universiby Pegasus Library) from the public net from
> International Centre for Theoretical Physics, IC/80/158.
> International Atomic Energy Agency
> United Nations
> Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.
> 1980 Miramare - Trieste, 5467/80, 30 double pages)
> Best Regards, Hannu Poropudas, Kolamäentie 9E, 90900 Kiiminki / Oulu, Finland.