Oliver Thewalt

    Oliver Thewalt

    Theoretical Physics | Quantum Biology | Dark Matter Research | Energy Consulting | Creation of Hydrogen ATOM in the Higgs Field >> Vote for Nobel Prize

    Latest comments

    Electric charge - is this what we thought?

    Noether current: Noether current and Coulomb's law, have a look at the Antimatter (tachyonic charge identity) .. there are no symmetries or asymmetries as such in nature


    About Noether current


    Prof Márcio Roberto de Garcia Maia, Federal University of Southern Bahia,


     "It is not a technical (in the sense of engineering) concern, but rather the fact that it seems to me that, as it happens to mass, there is some circularity in its definition. So, when I say 'operational point of view', I mean ' how is it supposed to be measured and what assumptions are made in such a definition/measurement. For instance, what comes first: Coulomb law or the charge definition? Or is there some circularity between these two aspects? This concern is related to some calculations I have made related to a 'missing term' in Ampere-Maxwell law. The existence of this missing term is acknowledged by Hehl (Univ of Colony) and Obukhov in a series of papers (see 'premetric electrodynamics'). This leads to a certain ambiguity on the definition of the electromagnetic field, but they argue that one can get rid of this ambiguity performing certain experiments. And this is the point: it seems to me that the circularity ramains because the interpretation of such experiments depends on the definition of charge itself, and/or the Coulomb's law."



    I agree on your overall impression that there is something missing or to say in this way, that the interpretation or even some "ceteris paribus" conditions are wrong: 


    Examining Faraday's Law, it seems not just to be a question about  mass as a conductor or induced magnetic fields by a charge or  about an electro static potential which  was theorized, in Faraday's induction law: a current due to changes in the EM-Field, here magnetic flux ....


    Physicists should not separate EM fields as such by magnetic flux and currents in general, or mass from the quantum vacuum (concerning a quantum measurement for a quantum energy state in view to  mass or matter or  energy in view to mass or stability constraints for matter).


    By applying quantum physics we can show that the definition of an electric charge by Noether's charge is flawed due to the assumption of (gauge) symmetries and the interpretation of an absolute law of conservation of  energy, which I do not deny, but the INTERPRETATION depends on the "plane" of the  observation or measurement:  what should be conserved within what? 


    What is energy at all, and what mass? And here appears the  antimatter identity or charge identity respectively.


    This is because mass and energy are concepts by human beings or Einstein mainly for the so called real world in Einstein's  world view of a constant speed of light in the quantum vacuum and E=MC^2, but this fails for Faster than Light phenomena such as Dark Matter, Black Holes or Gravity.





    In general, it can be assumed that any deviation to the assumptions of the Standard Model would need a very precise measurement or very high energy fluxes, we may try to apply this for the Planck Scale from the very small to the very large, but more effectively,  because we are dealing here with quantum thresholds within a photonic mediation:  inducing and observing changes in energy potentials or extreme energy scaling and oscilaltions (neutrinos!, freqúency or dimensional transiting of BH virtual states!), spin - spin, spin orbit or angular momentum coupling via Pauli's Exclusion Principle  interesting reflection.


    .... the photonic mediation is within spin, charge identity and oscillation of the quantum energy states for the virtuals:  a moving charge induces a magnetic field - are we sure about cause and effect here? is the "cause" that the charge is moving resulting in the induction of a magnetic field or flux?  


    Within a quantized plane, I assume, it should not be possible (or quantum measurement?!) to tell cause from effect - this we should discuss  in further detail! 


    Hence I agree that “interpretation of such experiments depends on the definition of charge itself, and/or the Coulomb law.”


    For a more complete approach we should take into account the antimatter identity and tachyonic Black Hole identity - also in view of unfolding  electro-magnetic fields at Yang Mills AdS5 phase space by Black Hole to particle horizons.


    More evidence is provided by the discovery of Kobolts or Sprites  by NASA in the ionosphere (antimatter, or antimatter in gamma rays, thunderstorms: Gamma Rays and Antimatter in Terrestrial Gamma Ray Flashes (TGF).


     or of  hitherto unobserved “fields” in power transmission carriers by Zeptosecond Quantum cameras.


    Symmetries in nature are just a concept of the human mind, there cannot be a current flux as  such or any direction of a current as such, we should take into account the nuclear shell model and the quark gluon model in view to QCD …. More on that later


    Be aware of this:


    Comment by Michael Balmer on the Antimatter Thread as an excerpt:



    Michael Balmer, 01. Jan 2015, 10:21 AM

    "Matter,antimatter,dark matter,what about dark antimatter? What puts this all in conflict and turmoil is each persons subscribing to the term, in SuSy it is the anti-"partner" some say the opposite charge sign, some just think it is the evil twin out to get us, the opposite of the normal be it in observation of the negative or the positive it doesn't matter, the equality of distribution in infinity is a localized field represented by EMFields and Matter fields, in some areas such as Plasma Field of positive ions it is balance to antimatter but antimatter is unstable unshielded at the quantum level and at the macro level though still unstable and radioactive it's quantity is sufficient to maintain it's ability not to annihilate at once giving it's long half life this aided by the so called dark matter field separating the EMField at that point, the dark matter field acts as an insulator against the annihilation process,again,this is not at every point in space of this situation,when researching this on a quantum level the antimatter particles are not separate entities of matter but the same atom carrying it's anti charge,a proton and electron are by virtue of the opposing charge matter and anti matter to each other and not being the same means nothing ... the charge to mass ratio of the electron to the proton will show you this, it may be smaller but pound for pound as the saying goes puts it on an even field, now you can charge conjugate an atom and classify it as antimatter as well ... nature does it all the time ... this is where the positron appears."



    Mass is in Einstein's world view responsible for gravity, but mass could not be measured without that there is "somewhere" a (tachyonic) antimatter identity, the positron, which is not just an anti electron.


    Michael Balmer, Quote:


    "It has been asserted and accepted that within a nucleus happens a  conjugation of protons and neutrons...having said that, when the neutron converts to a proton, is this the loss of mass as well?


    ...radiation is the particle emitting the charge energy so to speak, to photons and neutrino interaction first is to administer the charge through the weak force, it's not really creating the proton but one aspect of it...the charge ... it is about decay and instability of the nucleus ...particles...and existence is based on three...negative ,positive and neutral, with hydrogen with a proton nucleus would be unstable and decay without the neutrality to stabilize it,this is where neutrinos are with Hydrogen,to replace the presence of a neutron.   


    How and why Quarks Conjugate


    Note by Michael Balmer


    The swirl function describes the gluon influence.




    The gluon keeps the quarks bonded, so there must be a neutral influence to prevent annihilation.

    The Z boson is the neutrality of the Wf (weak force)




    It is about color charge - and this  

    http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html, CC-BY-SA-3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/) or CC BY-SA 2.5-2.0-1.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5-2.0-1.0)], via Wikimedia Commons">Pn scatter pi0


    Nuclear force - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    The nuclear force (or nucleon–nucleon interaction or residual strong force) is the force between protons and neutrons, subatomic particles that are collectively called nucleons. The nuclear force is responsible for binding protons and neutrons into atomic nuclei. Neutrons and protons are affected by...

    .... as the implied assertion is: 


    the Isospin Quantum Number



    Michael Balmer,



    "The nucleus of an anti-hydrogen is a negative proton.

    To make it a negative proton, the up and down quarks must be reversed.

    It would be ionized to negative plasma, you can not shield a H1- ....

    the - e + e is the problem: as in QCD the anti H1 nucleus is unchanged: The swirl function with the neutron and gluons is a strong force phenomenon and only occurs in the nucleus, it is the workings of the gluons in holding the quarks together, it is a QCD not taught.

    You may find this hard to believe with our current physics because of Heisenberg, but  photons with a spin attribution (Quote Edited for better understanding) do exist.

    We cannot attain them until intergalactic travel is reached. The spin of the photon is based on the propagation and the energy of the event, the energy may not be carried off entirely by the photon, that is a low energy photon.

    This means that a complete conversion of the energy velocity and spin may be higher. Helicity is the direction of spin and angular momentum. But mostly associated with the spin of the electron. Whether its right or left spin, the Pauli it is how the two can occupy the same orbital path. The Higgs is a strong force or nucleus event. The Higgs particle assigns mass to itself and other atoms. 


    The up and down quarks of the proton:  One down and two up, down is negative 1/3 and positive 2/3.

    The neutron has one 1/3 pos and two 1/3 neg: one up positive and two down negative is a neutron.




    It is a neg proton the reverse of the quarks makes it a neutron

    A negative proton is the reverse of quarks, the reverse of quarks is a neutron.


    The anti hydrogen has a neutron nucleus.

    This is why it will not annihilate.