Nassim Haramein

.......
The relationship between the Lindquist and Wheeler Schwarzschild sphere and the vertices of the Battaner and Florido regular geometric structure of superclusters can be compared. For N vertices, each vertex can be equidistant from its nearest neighbor only when N= 5, 8, 16, 24, 120, or 600 [94]. The case where N=8 yields the simplest arrangement. In this lattice, N=5, 16, and 600 correspond to a tetrahedron, N= 8 to a cube, N=24 to an octahedron, and N= 120 to a dodecahedron. Correspondence is made in terms of the ratio of the distance from a face to a corner of a cell of some volume of a regular polyhedron to a sphere.
One of us (Rauscher) [25] treated the whole Universe as expanding under a Schwarzschild condition. We found that consistence between Einstein's field equations with big bang cosmologies can be obtained but requires the introduction of an additional term in the stress-energy tensor. We can associate this term with the torque term in Einstein's field equations in the Haramein-Rauscher model [3]. One of us (Haramein), has put forward the need to include spin and torque to modify the simplistic Schwarzschild metrical zones of Lindquist and Wheeler although their model is very useful in our considerations even if it is clearly a limited case.
The motivation of the Lindquist and Wheeler model is that the cell method in gravitational theory contains a new dynamic feature which expresses the equation of motion of a mass at the center of a cell as a dynamic condition on the boundary of the cell. The boundary condition defines a constraint on the space which comprises simple geometric forms. The whole of the dynamics of this model are expressed in terms of the expansion and subsequent contraction of the Schwarzschild solution to Einstein's field equation. Their analogy is to that of a crystal lattice and by defining cells in terms of a Schwarzschild solutions in a curved space, in a simple Friedman metric of uniform curvature which corresponds to a polyhedron in Euclidian space. They derive a boundary condition on the Schwarzschild potentials which do not go to zero at a finite radius and hence avoids the discontinuity of matching the normal derivative of the gravitational potentials which would occur in the Schwarzschild solution alone. In the lattice Universe, mass is concentrated into N centers (or vertices) which could correspond to the galactic cluster centers in the Battener and Florido analysis [87,88]. In each cell, a Schwarzschild black hole is located at the center of its own cell. In their figure 3, six cone shapes define their boundary conditions in a lattice Universe and correspond to the vertices of an octahedron. Therefore, a parallel can be made between the work of Lindquist and Wheeler, Battener and Florido and our model which predicts a polarized structured vacuum. Hence, Lindquist and Wheeler's approach using the Schwarzschild cell solution without spin or charge gives a good first-order approximation. We use the Kerr-Newman with spin and charge and incorporate the torque and Coriolis forces in the Haramein-Rauscher solution to quantize the vacuum into cells.


We consider the topological structures of the current string theory and our approach to the unified theory of the four forces and structured vacuum [3].
Although superstring theories have their critics, due to the fact that those theories contain a number of "free" parameters, there has been great interest in these theories by the physics community. Superstring theory has been related to the standard model. Some string theories contain gravity and others do not. One of the major features of superstring theory is to treat particles as tiny loops rather than as point particles so as to avoid the problem of singularities. The string theory approach has some topological similarities to that of Lindquist and Wheeler's work, which is an effort to avoid singularities. In the string theory, particles are treated as vibrations of a membrane (Brane M as a surface), which is swept out by the vibrating string occurring in eight dimensional space. These eight dimensions comprise eight of the ten dimensional standard model in which two of the dimensions are the string surface itself. This vibrational space carries the symmetry of the Lie group E₈ [95].
Superstring theory represents both bosonic and fermionic particle states. The usual string theories occupy a 26-dimensional spacetime, representing bosonic particle states. A quantum state of identical bosonic particles is symmetric under the exchange of any two particles. A quantum state of identical fermionic particles is antisymmetric under the exchange of any two particles to include the photon and gravitation. Then we have 64=8x8 dimensional states in some superstring theories. The closed string theory is called a type II string theory, which has the doubly fermionic states included, for a total of 128=8x8x2 fermionic states [96].
In addition to the type II, there are two heterotic superstring theories which involve closed strings. Out of the 26-L bosonic coordinates of the bosonic factor, only ten are matched to R-bosonic coordinates of the superstring factor, hence this theory effectively exists in ten-dimensional spacetime. Heterotic strings come in two versions, that is E₈xE₈ and the SO₃₂. The Ramond vacuum is included and E₈ is the highest dimensional exceptional group. The E₈xE₈ superstring theory is derived from the compilation of M-theory. One of the most promising superstring theories that unifies the four forces is the E₈xE₈ reflection space. This is possible only because reflection embedding provides for an embedding of A₄ in E₈ [97]. In our paper reference [3] we present the symmetry group relationship between A₄ and the 24 element octahedral group. This procedure operates along the lines of the relationship between the SO₃₂ heterotic string theory which also utilizes the E₈xE₈ formalism. However, we believe our approach to gravitation and strong interactions, which considers the inclusion of torque and Coriolis effects will result in a simplification and a more fundamental formalism with fewer free parameters.

In general, the Lie algebra A_n associated with a reflection space C_n has a compact Lie group SU_n+1 .
S.P. Sirag attempts to develop a unified field theory in terms of U₁xSU₂xSU₃xSU₄ , where he identifies the SU₄ group with the tensor gravitational field [98]. Note that gravity is missing from the SU₅ theory.
The SO(32) , or SO₃₂ , is the group generated by 32-by-32 matrices that are orthogonal. For the strong force, gluons are described by a four dimensional SU₃ Yang-Mills theory. The full set of standard model gauge bosons is described by the Yang-Mills theory with the gauge group SU₃xSU₂xU₁. Alternatively, for the U₅=SU₂xSU₃ Yang-Mills theory, the gauge group that emerges as U₃xU₂=SU₂xSU₃xU₁xU₁ where U₁xU₁ is the topology of the torus. Note that the A₄ group of the tetrahedron is the label for a complex Lie algebra whose compact Lie group is SU₅ which comprised the first unification, GUT theory. The standard force bosons are derived from the group SU₃xSU₂xU₁ in the group algebra.
In the heterotic E₈xE₈ superstring theory, six of the nine spatial dimensions are curled up into a small sixdimensional compact space, which is termed the Calabi-Yau space. All Calabi Yau spaces have both discrete and continuous parameters which determine the details of the four-dimensional theory that arises upon compactification.
For all Calabi-Yau spaces, the minimal amount of supersymmetry survives the compactification and the resulting four-dimensional theory is supersymmetric. The compactification also allows one to break the original gauge symmetry E₈xE₈ down to E₆xE₈. The group E₆ contains U₁xSU₂xSU₃ as a subgroup to that standard model gauge group. An alternative to the 6-dimensional space compactification of the heterotic string is an alternative 6-dimensional space where one can simply use a six-torus T⁶ group space. The T⁶ space, however, has singularities that arise at the fixed points of certain identifications, but orbitals constructed from tori are much easier to analyze than the general Calabi-Yau spaces.
For the following Lie group S=U₂xT⁶ where U₂ is a four dimensional spacetime called the conformally compactified Minkowski space and T⁶ =U₁xU₁xU₁xU₁xU₁xU₁ , or a 3-torus. We regard SU₂ as a spherical three space, S³, as the usual space of cosmology. For a 7-torusT⁷ which incorporates U₁ from the U₂ space also includes time. The T⁷ tori space corresponds to the 7-reflection space E⁷ because T⁷ = R⁷/L where R⁷ is the real part of the E⁷ which also contains the complex reflection space C⁷ , and L is the root of E⁷.
This means that all parts of the lattice are identified as a single point: the identity element of T⁷ and every other point of T⁴ is a copy of L . The T⁴ group can be identified with two double tori. We have identified the double torus structure as fundamental to a metric of spacetime which appropriately accounts for the source of spin/angular momentum. Many striking examples of this dynamic structure are observed at the cosmological scale such as galactic halos, black hole ergosphere and supernovae.
The S⁴ group is associated with the 24 element octahedral group C{Obar} which can be written in terms of C{Obar}=U₂xU₂(bar)xU₄ or T⁸ group [3]. Both C{O} and C{Obar} relate to the T⁴ double torus group of four copies of U₁ where T_n is the direct product of n copies of U₁ , which comprises the n-torus, which is always an Abelian group. The Tⁿ group refers to the structure of spacetime. We have related this spacetime structure to the torque term in Einstein's field equations [3]. Hence, the torus topology can be considered fundamental to the structure of spacetime and also the tenets in the superstring theory.
Hull utilized string theory in a "T-fold-background" with local n-torus fabrication and T-duality transition functions in O{n,n;Z} in an enlarged space with T²ⁿ fabrication geometry [99]. For a geometric background, the local choice of Tⁿ fit together to give a spacetime which is a Tⁿ fiber bundle. Thus this string theory approach involves diffeomorphisms and gauge transformations as well as duality transformations. The T-duality is associated with mirror symmetry [100]. In some cases, the compactifications with duality are equivalent to asymmetric orbits. The full transition functions for the torus bundles, which are considered in Hull's approach, are in GL{n,Z}xU₁ⁿ, where U₁ acts as a translation on a circle fiber. String theory compactification of dimensions on the T ⁿ has O{n,n;Z} symmetry. In the geometric GL{n,Z} subgroup that acts through Tⁿ diffeomorphisms, can be lifted to a higher dimensional theory which is compactified on a Tⁿ fiber bundled over a circle.
A T-duality on any circle gives a twisted reduction on a T² fiber bundled over a circle in GL{2,Z} which is representative of a dual torus. These mirror, or duality symmetries are related to space with Calabi-Yau fibrations in space with torus fibrations [99]. The topology of T-folds, and their doubled formulations, is then seen as a geometric background in which there is a global polarization. The polarization can be characterized in terms of a product on the T²ⁿ fibers. Local product structures satisfy integrability thus eliminating the problems of singularities. A product structure defines a splitting into eigenspaces of R with eigenvalues ±1 and for a torus T²ⁿ. This extends to a splitting as the periodic torus coordinates into two Tⁿ eigenspaces, if the product structure is integral, or R is an element of GL(2n,Z ) , so that it acts on the coordinates while preserving the periodicities. A product structure and pseudo-Hermitian O{n,n} invariant metric are together preserved by the subgroup GL(n.R) subset O{n,n} and for the transformations acting on the torus and is preserved by GL(2n,Z) subset O(n,n;Z) [3,5,20,47]. The fundamental structures activated in the vacuum by polarized coherent resonant states of matter also act as part of the process that creates these vacuum properties.
To paraphrase John A. Wheeler, "Spacetime is not just a passive arena for doing physics, it is the physics" [2]. The torquing of spacetime is an active part of the structure of the stress-energy tensor and hence is a fundamental force coupling to produce the observable universe of matter and energy.

CONCLUDING REMARKS
We have a vast new set of tools to comprehend the processes of astrophysical and cosmological phenomena, atomic and collective matter states. For example some of the collective state phenomena we have considered are accelerator "fireballs," Bose-Einstein condensates, Fermi electron states, MHD and BCS descriptions, all of which obey soliton dynamic solutions. Theoretical and experimental findings and relativistic formulations, quantum theory, electromagnetic interactions can well be described in terms of topological structures and group theory. The fundamental base of our approach is to consider that the topological structure of a torquing spacetime, and its Coriolis gyroscopic dynamics, has critical aspects of unification theory.
We pursue this point further in references [39,101,102] when we consider atomic, nuclear, and quantum physics in a nonlinear space. When a torque and Coriolis term is considered for the formation of spin/angular momentum we find that the dual torus topology occupies a fundamental role in both astrophysics and quantum particle physics. The Haramein-Rauscher approach takes spin and rotation properties as fundamental to the structure of the spacetime manifold. We have identified the properties of the structure of the vacuum itself from fundamental coherent polarized states of matter in the facility of astrophysical black hole event horizons. That is to say, we have demonstrated that the properties of matter in superclusters, galaxies, supernovae and their vicinities, for example, could exist in resonant states, only if the vacuum is structured. These considerations may also be utilized to explain the effects that are currently attributed to dark matter and dark energy.
In the words of Nobel laureate C. N. Yang, of the Yang-Mills equation "Einstein's general relativity theory, though profoundly beautiful, is likely to be amended... that the amendment may not disturb the usual test is easy to imagine, since the usual tests do not relate to spin... somehow (the amendment) entangles spin and rotation" [103].


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors express their sincere appreciation to William Van Bise, Marina Nogues, Michael Coyle, Michael Hyson, Jeremy Broner, and for the opportunity to work with the Resonance Project Foundation and its team [104].
Support for some aspects of earlier projects came from Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.


REFERENCES
[1] A.Einstein, Relativity, the Special and General Theory (Crown Publishers, Inc., New York 1961)
[2] J.A. Wheeler, Geometrodynamics (Academic Press, New York and London 1962) and private communication with E.A. Rauscher, 1974-1982, on expanding on Einstein's theory.
[3] N. Haramein and E.A. Rauscher, "The Origin of Spin: A Consideration of Torque and Coriolis Forces in Einstein's Field Equations and Grand Unification Theory," in Beyond the Standard Model: Searching for Unity in Physics, R.L. Amoroso. B. Lehnert & J-P Vigier (eds.) Oakland: The Noetic Press. (see this volume pp. 153-168) Physics, R.L. Amoroso. B. Lehnert & J-P Vigier (eds.) Oakland: The Noetic Press. (see this volume pp. 153-168)
[4] N. Haramein and E.A. Rauscher, "The Quest for the Higgs Boson and its Planck Black Hole Production at the CERN Large Hadron Collider," Bull. Am. Phys. Soc. S8002 (2003).
[5] E.A. Rauscher, "Electron Interactions and Quantum Plasma Physics," J. Plasma Physics 2, 517 (1968) and additional research (1992 and 2000).
[6] E.A. Rauscher, "Dynamic Plasma Excitation Modes of Propagation in the Ionosphere," US, PA Press, 13, 295 (Wisconsin, 2004).
[7] Ya. B. Zeldovich and Yu. P. Rayzer, Physics of Shock Waves and High Temperature Hydrodynamic Phenomena (Academic Press, New York 1967).
[8] N. Haramein and E.A. Rauscher, "Strong and Gravitational Forces in Black Hole Physics," in progress.
[9] T. Feder, "Astronomers Envision Linking Data Archives," Physics Today 55, 20 (2002).
[10] S. Ichimaru, Basic Principles of Plasma Physics: A Statistical Approach (W.A. Benjamin, Inc. Advanced Book Program, Massachusetts, London, Sydney, Tokyo, 1973).
[11] A.A. Vlasov, "Theory of Vibrations Properties of Electron Gas and its Application," JETF 8, 291 (1938) and Moscow (1945).
[12] L.D. Landau, JETF 16, 574 (1946).
[13] H. Andreasson, "The Einstein-A.A. Vlasov System / Kinetic Theory," Living Rev. Relativity 5, 7 (2002), http://www.livingreviews.org/lrr-2002-7, ISSN1433-8351.
[14] D.E. McCumber, Rev Mod. Phys. 38, 491 (1966).
[15] D. Bohm and D. Pines, "A Collective Description of Electron Interactions. I. Magnetic Interactions," Phys. Rev. 82, 625 (1951) and private communication between D. Bohm and E.A. Rauscher (1977-1982).
[16] S. Ichac, Am. Phys. 20, 78 (1962).
[17] D. Ter Haar, Introduction to the Physics of Many Body Systems (Interscience Publications on Physics and Astronomy, No. 5, New York 1958).
[18] J. Bardeen and D. Pines, "Electron-Phonon Interaction in Metals," Phys. Rev. 99, 1140 (1955).
[19] R.W. Lindquist and J.A. Wheeler, "Dynamics of a Lattice by the Schwarzschild-Cell Method," Rev. of Mod. Phys. 29, 432 (1957).
[20] N. Haramein and E.A. Rauscher, "The Dynamic Crystal Lattice Group Theoretical Vacuum Structure in the Unified Field," in progress.
21] J. Bardeen, L.N. Cooper, and J.R. Schrieffer, "Theory of Superconductivity," Phys. Rev. 108, 1175 (1957).
[22] L. Cooper, "Bound Electron Pairs in a Degenerate Fermi Gas," Phys. Rev. 104, 1189 (1956).
[23] J. Bardeen, Handbook of Phys. 15, 274 (1956).
[24] J.R. Schrieffer, The Many Body Problem (Wiley & Sons, New York 1959).
[25] E.A. Rauscher, "On the Evolution of a Schwarzschild Universe," Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Report (LBL-4353 1975), and Cosmology and Quantum Theory, edited by R.L. Amoroso, Oakland: The Noetic Report (LBL-4353 1975), The Noetic Press (2007).
[26] E.A. Rauscher, "The Fundamentals of Fusion," University of California Engineer, 20 (1960).
[27] A.C. Scott, F.Y.F. Chu, and D.W. McLaughin, Proc. IEEE 61, 1443 (1973).
[28] A.C. Scott, "The Birth of a Paradigm," in Nonlinear Electromagnetics, edited by P.L.E. Uslenghi, 35 (Academic Press, New York 1980).
[29] H. Washimi and T. Taniuti, "Propagation of Ion-Acoustic Solitary Waves of Small Amplitude," Phys. Rev. Lett. 17, 996 (2001).
[30] L.C. Lee and J.R. Kan, "Nonlinear Ion-acoustic Waves and Solitons in a Magnetized Plasma," Phys. of Fluids 24, 430 (1981).
[31] P.K. Shakla and M.Y. Yu, "Exact Solitary Ion-acoustic Waves in a Magnetoplasma," J. Math Phys, 19, 2506 (1978).
[32] R.L. Sagdeev and A.A. Galeev, Non-Linear Plasma Theory (Benjamin, New York 1969).
[33] B. Sutherland, Beautiful Models: 70 Years of Exactly Solved Quantum Many-Body Problems (World Scientific, River Edge, New Jersey 2004).
[34] S. S. Schweber, Introduction to Relativistic Quantum Field Theory (Harper & Row, New York 1961).
[35] S.W. Hawking, "Particle Creation by Black Holes," Comm. Math. Phys. 43, 199 (1975).
[36] J.D. Hartle and S.W. Hawking, "Path Integral Derivation of Black-Hole Radiance," Phys. Rev. D 13, 2188 (1976).
[37] S.W. Hawking and G.F.R. Ellis, Large Scale Structure of Space Time (Cambridge University Press, London 1974).
[38] E.A. Rauscher, Electromagnetic Phenomena in Complex Geometries and Nonlinear, Non-Hertzian Waves (Tesla Book Co., California, 1983), to be republished by The Noetic Press, California (2007).
[39] E.A. Rauscher, "Conceptual Charges in New Reality Models from Discoveries in Physics: Complexification of the Schrödinger Wave Equation," ICF Press, New York, Korea 1407 (1981).
[40] T.H. Boyer, "Quantum Zero-Point Energy and Long Range Forces," Annals of Phys. 56, 474 (1970).
[41] H.B.G. Casimir, "On the Attraction Between Two Perfectly Conducting Plates," Proc. Kon. Ned. Akad. Wetenschap. 5, 793 (1948).
[42] E.A. Rauscher, "Electromagnetic Phenomena in Complex Minkowski Spaces," Bull. Am. Phys. Soc. 28, 351(1983).
[43] F. Wilczek, "Scaling Mount Planck," Phys. Today, 55, 10 (2002).
[44] N. Haramein and E.A. Rauscher, "A Consideration of Torsion and Coriolis Effects in Einstein's Field Equations," Bull. Am. Phys. Soc. S10.016 (2003).
[45] N. Haramein, "A Scaling Law for Organized Matter in the Universe," Bull. Am. Phys. Soc. AB006, (2001).
[46] E.P. Wigner and F. Seitz, "On the Constitution of Metallic Sodium," Phys. Rev. 43, 804 (1933) on the theory of solids and private communication between E.P. Wigner and E.A. Rauscher (1981-1986).
[47] N. Haramein and E.A. Rauscher, "Lattice Structure and the Kerr-Newman Cell Method," (in progress).
[48] R.Z. Sagdeev and A.A. Galeev, Nonlinear Plasma Theory (Benjamin, New York 1969).
[49] E.A. Rauscher, "Closed Cosmological Solutions to Einstein's Field Equations," Lett. Nuovo Cimento, 3, 661 (1972).
[50] E.A. Rauscher, "A Unifying Theory of Fundamental Processes," Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Report (UCRL-20808 June 1971) and Bull. Am. Phys. Soc. 13, 1643 (1968).
[51] C.L. Grabbe, "Generation of Broadband Electrostatic Waves in Earth's Magnetotail," Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 3614 (2000).
[52] R.C. Davidson, Methods in Nonlinear Plasma Theory (Academic Press, New York 1972).
[53] M. Polanyi, "A New Thermodynamic Consequence of the Quantum Hypothesis," Verhandl. Deut. Physik. Ges.15, 156 (1913).
[54] W. Nernst, Nachr. d. Kgl. Ges. d. Wissensch. Gittingen, Math. Phys. KL. (1906) and republished, The New Heat Theorem: Its foundations in theory and experiment (Dover Pub. Inc., 1969).
[55] P. Uttley, "Active Galactic Nuclei as Scaled-Up Galactic Black Holes," Nature 444, 730 (2006).
[56] C. Ramon and E.A. Rauscher, "Superluminal Transformations in Complex Minkowski Spaces," Found. of Phys. 10, 661 (1980).
[57] E.A. Rauscher, "Solitary Waves, Coherent Non-dispersive Waves in Complex Minkowski Spaces," Bull. Am.Phys. Soc. 27, 35 (1982).
[58] E.A. Rauscher, "The Minkowski Metric for a Multidimensional Geometry," Lett. Nuovo Cimento 7, 361(1973).
[59] R. Penrose, "Gravitational Collapse and Space-Time Singularities," Phys. Rev. Lett. 14, 57 (1965).
[60] K.S. Thorne and C.M. Will, "Theoretical Framework for Testing Relativistic Gravity," Astrophys. J., 163, 595 (1971).
[61] B.S. DeWitt, "Dynamical Theory in Curved Spaces. I. A Review of the Classical and Quantum Action Principles," Rev. Mod. Phys. 29, 377 (1957) and private communication with E.A. Rauscher (1967).
[62] J.B. Kogut and M.A. Stephanor, "The Phases of Quantum Chromo-dynamics: From Confinement to Extreme Environments," (Cambridge University Press, New York 2004).
[63] H. Nastase, "The RHIC fireball as a Dual Black Hole," http://xxx.lanl.gov, arXiv Archive, hep-th/0501068, v.2 (Brown University, Brown HET 1439 February 16, 2005).
[64] K.Tuchin, "On Black Hole Horizon Fluctuations," Nucl. Phys. B 553, 333 (1999).
[65] D. Kharzeev, Y.V. Kovchegov, and K. Tuchin, "Nuclear Modification Factor in D+Au Collisions: Onset of Suppression in the Color Glass Condensate," Phys. Lett. B 599, 23 (2004).
[66] D. Kharzeev and K. Tuchin, "From Color Glass Condensate to Quark Gluon Plasma through the Event Horizon," Nucl. Phys. A 753 316 (2005).
[67] G. Chapline, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, edited by T.D. Black, M.M. Nieto, H.S. Scully, and M. Sinclair, 255 (World Scientific, Singapore 1992).
[68] D. Kharzeev, E. Levin, K. Tuchin, "QCD in Curved Space-Time: A Conformal Bag Model," Phys. Rev. D 70, 4005 (2005).
[69] R.B. Laughlin, "Emergent Relativity," Int. J. Mod. Phys., A 18, 831 (2003).
[70] K. Fossheim, A. Sudboe, Superconductivity: Physics and Applications (Wiley, New York 2004).
[71] G. Chapline, "Quantum Phase Transitions and the Failure of Classical General Relativity," Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 18, 3587 (2003).
[72] E.A. Rauscher, "Application of Soliton Physics to Plasma - MHD and Superconductivity - BCS: Theoretical Implications for Primary Energy," Requested report Primary Energy Technologies of Los Angeles (PSRL-3107 Tecnic Research Laboratory, November, 1982).
[73] D.L. Dexter and R.S. Knox, Excitations (Wiley, New York 1965).
[74] V. D. Hunt, Superconductivity Sourcebook (John Wiley and Sons, New York, Toronto, Singapore 1989).
[75] E.A. Rauscher, "Quantized plasmas," Bull. Amer. Phys. Soc. 15, 1639, (1970).
[76] E.F. Gross, Nuovo Cimento Suppl. 3, 672 (1956).
[77] Ji, H. S., et al., "Hydrodynamic Turbulence Cannot Transport Angular Momentum Effectively in Astrophysical Disks," Nature 444, 343-346 (November 16, 2006).
[78] Spence, E. J. et al., "Observation of a Turbulence-Induced Large Scale Magnetic Field," arXivhysics/0511029 V2 (December 5, 2005).
[79] Alboussiere, T., et al., "MHD Turbulence in a Rotating Spherical Couette Flow of Sodium with an Imposed Dipolar Magnetic Field," GTP Workshop on Modeling MHD Turbulence: Applications to Planetary and Stellar Dynamos, at: NCAR (Boulder, CO. 27-30 June, 2006).[80] H. Stocker, "Collective Flow Signals the Quark-gluon Plasma," Nuclear Physics A 750, 121 (2005).
[81] Z. Foder and S.D. Katz, JHEP 0203-014 (2002) and JHEP 0404-050 (2004).
[82] G.A. Thomas, "An Electron Hole liquid," Sci. Amer. 28 (June 1976).
[83] Dressler, D. Lynden-Bell, D. Burstein, R.L. Davis, S.M. Faber, R. Terlevich, and G. Wagner, Ap. J., 313, 42 (1987).
[84] T. Lauer, et al. "The Masses of Nuclear Black Holes in Luminous Elliptical Galaxies and Implications for the Space Density of the Most Massive Black Holes," arXiv Archive, astro-ph/0606739, v.1 (June 29, 2006).
[85] K.I. Strecker, et al., "Formation and Propagation of Matter-wave Soliton Trains," Nature 417, 150 (2002).
[86] L. Khaykovich, et al., "Formation of a Matter-Wave Bright Soliton," Science 296, 1290 (2002).
[87] E. Battaner, "The Fractal Octahedron Network of Large Scale Structure," arXiv Archive, astro-ph/9801276 (January 28, 1998).
[88] E. Battaner and E. Florido, "Egg-Carton Universe," arXiv Archive, astro-ph/9802009 (February 2, 1998).
[89] N. Haramein, presentation at the Unified Theories conference (Budapest, Hungary 2006) in R.L. Amoroso, I. Dienes, & Cs. Varga (eds.) Unified Theories, Oakland: The Noetic Press, www.theresonanceproject.org/research/scientific.htm.
[90] JPL, "Cassini Images Bizarre Hexagon on Saturn," www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.cfm?release=2007-034 (Jet Propulsion Laboratory, 2007).
[91] Eric Weisstein (Wenzel Jamnitzer in 1568), Kepler (Harmonice Mundi in 1619), http://mathworld.wolfram.com/StellaOctangula.html (Wolfram MathWorld 2007).
[92] R.B. Tully, R. Scaramella, G. Vettalani, and G. Zamorani, Ap. J. 388, 9 (1992).
[93] H.P. Robertson, "Relativistic Cosmology," Rev. Mod. Phys. 5, 62 (1933).
[94] H.M.S. Coxeter, Regular Polytopes (Methun and Co., Ltd., London 1948).
[95] M.B. Green and D.J. Gross, eds., Workshop on Unified String Theories: 29 July-16 August 1985, Institute for Theoretical Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara (World Scientific, Singapore 1986).
[96] B. Zwiebach, String Theory (Cambridge University Press, UK 2004).
[97] M.J. Duff, "Recent Results in Extra Dimensions," in The Physics in Higher Dimensions, edited by T. Piran and S. Weinberg (World Scientific, Singapore 1986) and Nucl. Phys. B235, 610 (1990).
[98] S. P. Sirag, "The Cosmology of Consciousness: A Group Theory Approach," Presentation, University of California, Berkeley, Dwinelle Hall, (Preprint and private communication September 28, 1987).
[99] G.M. Hall, "A Geometry for Non-Geometric String Backgrounds," arXiv Archive, hep-th/0406102, v.3 (July 14, 2005).
[100] Strominger, S.T. Yau, and E. Zaslow, Nucl. Phys. B 479, 243 (1996) and "Mirror Symmetry is T-Duality," arXiv Archive, hep-th/9606040 (June 14, 1996).
[101] N. Haramein and E.A. Rauscher, "Nonlinear Quantum Theory Under the Influence of Torque and Coriolis Forces," (in progress).
[102] N. Haramein and E.A. Rauscher, "The Balance Equation in a Haramein-Rauscher Metrical Space," (in progress).
[103] Stanford University, NASA, "The Gravity Probe B Story," http://einstein.stanford.edu/content/story_of_gpb/gpb_story.pdf (Stanford, CA 2007).
[104] www.theresonanceproject.org

Posted Jan 3rd 2011


Dear Mr. Bermanseder,

Thank you very much for attaching this information. Again, we do ask for your understanding and patience in terms of a more detailed reply, as Mr.
Haramein is currently under deadline for some important projects.

Best Regards,

Stephanie Vendrell
The Resonance Project

Original Message:
-----------------
From: Tony Bermanseder pacificap@hotmail.com
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 15:18:12 +1100
To: stephanie@theresonanceproject.org
Subject: RE: To Dr. Haramein - Confirmations



Dear Stephanie!

Please find attached the pdf format of my critique on the Haramein-Rauscher
plasma paper.

pacificap@hotmail.com or omniphysics@cosmosdawn.net



Posted Jan 3rd 2011

"good work, is good work ~ this work is beyond good" Love - Susan

Posted Jan 3rd 2011


SusanLove; yes look at this excerpt from the above.
You see the X is Phi; so this is not made explicitly stated in the technical critique. So this formalism actually shows HOW the PHI is connected to the Alpha of the physicists; the strings of higher D and the birth of the universe.

What depicts what you were posting and presenting on the skype channel. So the technical lingo also represents your metaphysics - as the mainstream (albeit revolutionary there) science of material reductionisms.

Tonyblue

This pentagonal supersymmetry can be expressed in a number of ways, say in a one-to-one mapping of the Alpha finestructure constant as invariant X from the Euler Identity:
X+Y=XY= -1=i²=exp(iπ).
One can write a Unification Polynomial: (1-X)(X)(1+X)(2+X)=1 or X⁴+2X³-X²-2X+1=0
to find the coupling ratios: f(S)¦f(E)¦f(W)¦f(G)=#¦#³¦#¹⁸¦#⁵⁴ from the proportionality
#¦#³¦{[(#³)²]}³¦({[(#³)²]}³)³=Cuberoot(Alpha):Alpha:Cuberoot(Omega):Omega.

The Unification polynomial then sets the ratios in the inversion properties under modular duality:
(1)[Strong short]¦(X)[Electromagnetic long]¦(X²)[Weak short]¦(X³)[Gravitational long]
as 1¦X¦X²¦X³ = (1-X)¦(X)¦(1+X)¦(2+X).
Unity 1 maps as (1-X) transforming as f(S) in the equality (1-X)=X²; X maps as invariant of f(E) in the equality (X)=(X); X² maps as (1+X) transforming as f(W) in the equality (1+X)=1/X; and X³ maps as (2+X) transforming as f(G) in the equality (2+X)=1/X²=1/(1-X).

The mathematical pentagonal supersymmetry from the above then indicates the physicalised T-duality of M-theory in the principle of mirror-symmetry and which manifests in the reflection properties of the heterotic string classes HO(32) and HE(64), described further in the following.
Defining f(S)=#=1/f(G) and f(E)=#².f(S) then describes a symmetry breaking between the 'strong S' f(S) interaction and the 'electromagnetic E' f(E) interaction under the unification couplings.
This couples under modular duality to f(S).f(G)=1=#⁵⁵ in a factor #^-53=f(S)/f(G)={f(S)}² of the 'broken' symmetry between the longrange- and the shortrange interactions.

SEWG=1=Strong-Electromagnetic-Weak-Gravitational as the unified supersymmetric identity then decouples in the manifestation of string-classes in the de Broglie 'matter wave' epoch termed inflation and preceding the Big Bang, the latter manifesting at Weyl-Time as a string-transformed Planck-Time as the heterotic HE(64) class.

Post last edited Nov 26th 2012

Posted Aug 6th 2011

https://vimeo.com/26514171

Interview with Nassim Haramein
from Radio Serenidad 3 years ago Not Yet Rated
We talked about the structure of the vacuum and how he found the gap between science and spirituality. It is a very, very interesting dialogue and also, for lay people that don't understand any physics, somehow it makes all sense. Nassim has a way to reach people even with his technical scientific terms and we hope to have more of him. Hope you enjoy it



Interview with Nassim Haramein from Radio Serenidad on Vimeo.






SUSANakaTHE13THBRIDGE - Posted 3 Hours Ago long time ago, you emailed Haramein some important stuff was this what it was about ???


Nassim Haramein has calculated a geometric solution for the gravitational field. In his latest paper "Quantum Gravity and the Holographic Mass" he describes gravity in a classical algebraic way by calculating the density of the space both within and on the outside of the event horizon of a proton.
The seemingly "empty" vacuum of space is actually a nearly infinitely dense super-fluid medium made of tiny tiny tiny little frothing bubbles of energy. Sometimes called the "quantum foam", each of these miniscule vibrations represents a spherical wave form, or quanta, that is the diameter of the smallest possible measurable distance, the Planck length. Haramein calls these tiny spherical information bits Planck spherical units or PSUs. The PSUs on the interior of the proton's event horizon pack together in a perfectly space-filling overlapping 3D Flower of Life structure with each sphere's center being connected by a tetrahedral geometry lattice. The PSUs within the proton volume holographically project on the proton surface event horizon as "flat" equatorial circles in a flower of life tiling pattern.

In this image, the first equation describes the ratio between the proton surface area and the surface Planck circles showing that the number of equatorial circles on the Proton surface equals 10↑40 (10 to the 40 or 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000 Planck length diameter circles)
The second equation shows the number of Planck spherical units contained within the proton, which is 10↑60. In the third equation, the external surface horizon is divided by the internal volume and then multiplied by the Planck mass to give the total value of the proton mass. With a simple classical geometric calculation, Haramein obtains the mass of the proton according to the standard model, as measured from the outside, in the laboratory: 10↑-24 gm.
Haramein then calculates the external Planck circles divided by the internal Planck spheres to obtain the gravitational mass of the proton, which equals 10↑14 which is the exact amount of mass needed for the proton to obey what is called the the Schwarzschild condition of a black hole.
Protons are quantum scale black holes.
Gravity is a ratio of volume to surface area.

More info.: http://resonance.is/explore/quantum-gravity-and-the-holographic-mass-trailer-and-press-release/
The Resonance Project • The Resonance Project - Página Oficial Hispana • The Resonance Project - Traduction Française • Phys.org • Science • Physics-astronomy • Cosmos • Cosmometry • Physics Today •Thrive • ScienceAlert • ScienceAlert 中文

On first look, he fudged his numbers to obtain the codata proton mass Susan. 'The surface area of a proton and any subatomic 'particle' depends on the radius or 'size' of that particle. On the other hand, the Planck units are well defined as conglomerations of basic fundamental constants. And so using the 'correct' Planck-Volume and Planck-Mass, one can indeed calculate a correct Planck-Density. as r_P=M_P/L_P³ multiplied by a geometric factor, say 4p/3 for 3D or 2p² for 4D space.

I will calculate the proper value in this reply and publish them for you or anyone interested to peruse shortly.

From the insert below, you can see, that the radius/size of a proton is NOT fixed as some definitive value as Nassim seems to believe. And as both the Surface Area and the Volume of any particle or matter agglomeration are defined as function of its Radius, Nassim's calculations are at best approximations for any proton, which is better described as a 'waved particle' or wavicle in a form of quantum geometrical flux. Diagrams in the insert illustrate this further.

This then defines r_proton=1.3888...fm* = 1.38657...fm (Unit System International) and in the error interval of the Friar-Sick measurement as 1.394±0.016 fm in (1.378 - 1.410 fm) to 0.5%.

The 2010 CODATA recommended value for the protonic charge radius is: proton: R_p = 0.8775(51)*10^-15 m


Nevertheless a 'mean or average' value for the size of a proton can be used to calculate the values Nassim Haramein is proposing in his latest 'quasi scientific' endeavour of his 'Holographic Proton'.

From the treatise below' we use a particular averaged mean value for the protonic radius as 1.39x10^-15 meters and restrict our calculations to 3 significant figures to minimise any more serious deviation from this empirical and ubiquitously confirmed measurement.

My calculations can so be multiplied by a factor of 0.88/1.39=0.63 and 0.46 and 0.25 to align with the Haramein numbers for the 'unhaloed' proton he uses (in brackets).

Nassim uses the proton size WITHOUT the halo in its so termed 'charge radius' and in his holographic proton, the omission of its halo could be said to omit about half of the 'effective interaction' of the proton as a discretized collection of Planck-Areas and Volumes; which also are inferred by him to 'Overlap' in the 'Flower of Life' geometry. Nassim so describes a rather smaller or shrunk proton in his proposals.
In the calculus below, I am using the 'haloed proton' as described in the accompanying article from renowned researchers in the field of particle physics. Therefore my calculations actually 'improve' on the haramein model of the 'holographic proton', as it renders the proton bigger with a halo, then without one.

The volume of a spherical 3D-proton then becomes: 4p/3x(1.39x10^-15 m)³=1.12x10^-44 m³ and for a Surface Area of: 4p.(1.39x10^-15 m)²=2.43x10^-29 m²

The volume of a spherical proton as ellipsoidal 4D (Riemann) hyperspace then becomes:
2p²x(1.39x10^-15 m)³=5.30x10^-44 m³
and for a Surface Area of: 6p².(1.39x10^-15 m)²= 1.14x10^-28 m²

The corresponding Planck-Volumes and Planck-Areas are:

V_P=4p/3x√{Gh/2pc³}³=1.75x10^-104 m³ with A_P=4px√{Gh/2pc³}²=3.26x10^-69 m²
and V_P=2p²√{Gh/2pc³}³=8.24x10^-104 m³ with A_P=6p²√{Gh/2pc³}²=1.53x10^-68 m² respectively and for a L_P=1.61x10^-35 m (Codata values).

Nassims ratios so calculate in Codata values:

η=A_proton/A_P={2.43x10^-29}/{3.26x10^-69}=7.45x10³⁹ (3.43x10³⁹) ~ 10⁴⁰

and R=V_proton/V_P={1.12x10^-44}/{1.75x10^-104}=6.40x10⁵⁹ (1.6x10⁵⁹) ~ 10⁶⁰
for both the 3D case and for the 4D case, as the volume multipliers cancel themselves out.

Both of those codata recalculated values so indeed are approximated by Nassim's ratios η=10⁴⁰ and R=10⁶⁰, but any competent college student would have derived those same numbers on a 'back of the envelope' calculation.

Now the Planck-Mass is particularly defined by fundamental constants and as the formula: m_P=√{hc/2pG}=2.18x10^-8 kg.
The actual Planck-density is: ρ_P=m_P/L_P³=√(hc/2πG)(2πc³/Gh)³=]=2πc⁵/hG²=5.17x10⁹⁶ kg/m³ using a 'cubic volume' for the Planck Length.
It is because of this huge density and compared to the actual matter density in the universe (including the 'dark energy') of 3H_o²/8pG~8.8x10^-27 kg/m³; that a 96+27=123 order of magnitude discrepancy exists between the quantum physics of the vacuum and the matter containing universe.

Nassim's Proton mass calculation then is:

2η.m_P/R = 2(7.45x10³⁹)x{2.18x10^-8kg}/6.40x10⁵⁹=5.08x10^-28 kg and deviating from the Codata proton mass not by some miniscule amount,

but by {(16.7-5.08)x10^-28/1.67x10^-27}=0.70 and so by 30%.

The informed observer, then can see, why Nassim did not use actual Codata values for his density-radius formulations, but PRESUMED those to be in some manner exact or 'fluid' as 10⁴⁰ and 10⁶⁰ respectively.
One can easily manipulate those 'approximated' numbers to then calculate a precise codata value. And so my first 'suspicion proves correct Susan.
Nassim used the Codata value of the proton's mass to then simply and unjustifiably IMPLY, that the numbers 10⁴⁰ and 10⁶⁰ would 'self adjust' to yield the Codata value for its mass. This kind of approach is scientifically dishonest at best and a blatant agenda to support his nabs related quasi science at its misdemeanour.

Here is an example of what he did:
Write: 2η.m_P/R = 1.6714213x10^-27 kg for 2η/R={1.6714213x10^-27 kg /2.18x10^-8kg }=7.667...[some arbitrary decimal point aligned to the Planck Mass as defined]...x10^-20.

Then the requirement for the equation to hold becomes: 2η/R=7.667......x10^-20.
This condition IS in fact satisfied, should: η/R=3.83x10^-20 OR R/η=2.61x10¹⁹ ~ 10⁶⁰/10⁴⁰=10²⁰

I am afraid no one will be able to actually 'find' an exact calculation of this 'Haramein Equation' and why for instance he introduced an 'unnecessary factor of 2' to adjust the proton mass as validated by experiment to his Planck scale parameters and parameters which are correct from an elementary physics perspective. One could infer that as Nassim takes the Planck-Length as a Diameter L_P=D=2l_P (say), that his discrete Planck-Area count 4pl_P² = pL_P² in some manner only beknown to him introduces the factor of 2 (it should be 4 in the detail just stated).


 Generally, it can be ascertained, that Nassim likes to use the references of validated scientific research, such as can be read in his paper's introduction, mentioning the Schwarzschild metric and the Bekenstein-Hawking Entropy and Black Hole Bounds and parameters. Following the introduction and utility of the well established physical principles, he however often deviates into his particular ideas of what the universe should be like; often denouncing those principles as 'wrong' or incomplete and notwithstanding the verified models he espoused in his introduction.

Perhaps there is a particular evolvement of nabs science on the island of Hawaii. http://www.prnewswire.com/news-rele...potential-new-source-of-energy-206531571.html
'Contributions' from naïve and gullible nabsers would certainly help well meaning, but underinformed quasi scientific model builders to propagate their somewhat nebulous purposes and agendas.

IN CHRISTIAN art, a halo symbolises holiness. In particle physics, a ring of positive charge around the proton has become the focus of a devilish row. The dispute concerns an attempt to square a recent suggestion that the radius of the proton is smaller than we thought with the theory of quantum electrodynamics (QED), which has successfully explained quantum phenomena since the 1940s.
A proton's radius cannot be measured directly, but has to be deduced by measuring the energies of different electron "shells" in a hydrogen atom. Through QED, these energies combine with a model of how the proton's charge is distributed to give the proton's radius.
The smaller value for the proton radius came from measurements of an exotic form of hydrogen that contains a heavy type of electron known as a muon. This was expected merely to add precision to previous measurements based on ordinary hydrogen. Instead, the muonic measurements suggested a radius that was a whopping 4 per cent smaller (New Scientist, 10 July, p 10). That could signify a problem either with the muonic measurement or with QED, neither of which seems particularly likely.
Now Alvaro De Rújula of the Autonomous University of Madrid, Spain, has another solution: changing our model of how the proton's positive charge is distributed.
About 75 per cent of this charge is concentrated in a central core, the edge of which is considered the edge of the proton proper. Although the other quarter of the proton's charge lies outside this (see diagram), the charge distribution in the "halo" is still key to finding the proton radius. So De Rújula decided to explore whether varying the charge distribution in the halo could bring the old and new calculations for the proton's radius into agreement - and remove the conflict with QED.
He found that it can, if the halo band extends 4.7 times as far as previously thought. He concludes that this is the proton's true structure (Physics Letters B, DOI: 10.1016/j.physletb.2010.08.074).
The proposal has been contentious since De Rújula first posted it to the arxiv preprint server on 23 August. Chief among the sceptics are Gerald A. Millerand Ian Cloët of the University of Washington in Seattle, who posted a rebuttal just two days later. "De Rújula's explanation is simply off the wall," says Miller. "It is as if the amount of water in a thimble were spread out into the volume of a swimming pool".
This is an exaggeration, counters De Rújula, "unless the thimble covers a whale's face".
Miller concedes that a thimble and a pint glass is a fairer analogy. Even so, he and Cloët have calculated that a proton with a charge that extends as far as De Rújula suggests is not compatible with experiments looking at the extent to which electrons are deflected towards protons at different distances De Rújula says the matter could be resolved with new electron-proton collision experiments or fresh analysis of existing data. He is convinced that, somehow, "QED will be vindicated".


Commentary by Tonyblue:
The above information relates to the Unification template of the wavequarkian Proton Structure as described below in the technical critique of the proton charge halo.
The mechanistic quark-gluon model of the Standard Model, in which gluon 'springs' join and couple to billard ball like quarks has been untenable in unification physics for decades, but this has not been 'shared' with the populus of the scientific aware readership, such as the science programs on mainstream television.

The proton is a wave-particular dyad aka a wavicle, which is consciousness coupled to its environment via its internal Coulombic charge distribution of the mesonic Inner Ring of negative -1 electrocharge and its kernelled core of +2 positive electrocharge.
The wavefunction of the proton so quantum entangles with its surroundings under Coulombic electrocharge interaction defined in the electroweak gauge unification of the protonic quantum geometry.
Additionally, the magnetocharge coupling from the higher dimensional string couplings allow the lower dimensional electromagnetic interactions through and by agency of the mass-inertia manifestation, to realise this space-inherent waveprotonic consciousness in the measured realism of a matter based realism of experiences.

The 2010 Rujula paper is here: http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1008/1008.3861v3.pdf and is being challenged by a 2010 Cloët -Miller paper as to its theoretical and experimental feasibility, found here: http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1008/1008.4345v3.pdf.

In particular Miller and Cloët claim, that the protonic halo will attain its say mean boundary value at < p_proton>³= 2.71±0.13 fm³ for r_proton~1.394 fm (1.37-1.41 fm) and as experimentally measured by Friar and Sick via electron-proton scattering phenomena.
This value is confirmed as the protonic radius in Quantum Relativity; being precisely half of the Classical Electrodynamic Electron Radius:

R_electron=ke²/m_ec² = R_compton.alpha = h.alpha/2πm_ec=(2π/360)r_wormhole.10¹⁰ by the magnetic permeability finestructure of Maxwell's Constant in:
μ_o=1/ε_oc² = (8π/360)(Ne*/R_e) for Magnetocharge counter Ne*=2700e*/c³ = l_planck2700√(alpha)/[ec] from the Grand Unification of the Planck Length Oscillation (as a Minimum Displacement Parameter) in the String Epoch BEFORE the so called Quantum Big Bang (in Stoney Units) of: e/c²=l_planck√alpha and mapping electrocharge e in lower dimensional spacetime from the higher dimensional spacetime in:

Electron-DiameterxEnergy/Mass (or c²) = 2R_e.c²= e* ↔ e = l_planck√alpha.c² = Planck-Length-OscillationxEnergy/Mass (or c²)

onto the Planck-Length Oscillation in the higher dimensional spacetime, say 3D ↔ 12D.

This also defines a finestructure of Planck's Constant in: h=2πE_psr_wormhole/c=2πr_wormhole/e*c=1/e*f_wormhole for E_ps = 1/e* = 1/hf_ps = 2πr_wormhole/hc
R_electron=2.7777..fm* or recalibrated via [m=0.9983318783m*; s=0.9990230094s; kg=0.99626135kg*; C=0.997296076C*] to 2.773144.. fm (SI) for an electrodynamic electron mass of
m_e=h.alpha/2πc R_electron= 9.29053x10^-31 kg* = 9.255793..x10^-31kg (SI) differing from the CODATA value of m_e=h.alpha/2πc r_electron= 9.29053x10^-31 kg by (9.255793..-9.1093826)/9.1093826=0.01607.

Increasing the classical electron mass by 1.6% so reduces the classical electron radius by this amount (2.817940..fm to 2.77314.. fm) and as the classical electron radius of QED is twice the classical proton radius in the wavequarkian oscillation potential; the latter is reduced by 2x1.6%=3.2% and in tune with the muon-heavy hydrogen measurements pointing to the diminishing protonic core radius.
This then defines r_proton=1.3888...fm* = 1.38657...fm (Unit System International) and in the error interval of the Friar-Sick measurement as 1.394±0.016 fm in (1.378 - 1.410 fm) to 0.5%.

Subsequently; the 'sensational' measurement of a proton radius too small by about 4% confirms and substantiates the Classical Electron definition as postulated by Quantum Relativity and with an Effective Classical Electron mass m_e= 9.29053x10^-31kg rendered Relativistic as m_eeffective= 9.29053x10^-31kg in a relativistic inertia increase of m_eeffetive/m_e= 1/√(1-[v/c]²) and so for an effective electron base speed
v_eeffective=√( 1-[m_e/m_effective]²)=√0.0314=0.177..c through an electric potential of (m_eeffetive-m_e )c² /e=8.20 keV*.

The Solution to the 'misbehaviour' of the classical QED proton is found in the quarkian quantum geometry.
As can be ascertained from the below excerpt of the brane physics in Quantum Relativity and the following verification of Gerald Miller's experiments on the charge distribution in Neutrons; the proton's udu quark content is determined not in a mechanistic springy gluon model, but by the concentric kernel-ring structure of those wavequarkian constituents of the nucleons.
Then the udu waveproton is directionally symmetric about a magnetoaxis, which determines the wavefunctions for the overall proton to reattain spherical symmetry, albeit in a template pertaining to a so labeled Higgsian inertia induction (HBRMI=Higgs Bosonic RestMass Induction).
This HBRMI envelops all inertia carriers as a universal mass induction blueprint, which became however manifest at the Goldstone Boson time marker for the electroweak unification at TEW=3.4x10¹⁵ Kelvin, so 1/365 seconds following the time instanton at 3.33x10^-31seconds and at the Higgsian Vacuum Expectation value of so H=298 GeV, being the mass summation of the lower wavequarkian selfstates for the kernel-ring wavequarkian coupling eigenstates:

H=(W⁺+W^-+Z^o+lower order terms) and with diquark summations:
W=Σm_ij=(mOR-IR+mIR-K+mK=u+mKIR=u*=d+mKOR=d*=s+muu=U+mud=b + mus=m+mdd=D)
=Lepton-MesonRingVPE+Ring-KernelVPE+BaseQuark/Up+Pion/Down +Kaon/Strange+JPsi/Charm+Upsilon/Beauty+Epsilon/Magic+Omicron/Dainty
=(14.11+46.10+150.56+491.73+1606.04+5245.50+17132.33+55956.00)MeV*=80.642 GeV*=80.481 GeV (SI)
Z=½mds=t=Kappa/Truth=½(182.758)GeV*=91.38 GeV*=91.20 GeV (SI) H=½mss=S=½(596.907)GeV*=298.45 GeV*=297.86 GeV (SI) H=2W+Z+(δ=mIR-K)=(160.96+91.38+46.10)GeV=298.44 GeV

The Singlet is the Charm; the Doublet is the Beauty+Magic and the Triplet becomes the Dainty+Truth+Super quarkwavian groundstates centred on the Charm, the Beauty/Bottom and the Truth/Top.
The udu wavequark proton so finestructures a (+2/3+[+2/3-1]+2/3=+1) Coulombic charge distribution about a centralised protonic oscillation axis orthogonal to the colour-gluon charge aligning magnetoaxis as shown in the following scan.
The Rujula result then simply indicates the 'oscillatory' potential of the kernel-hugging Mesonic Ring as the 25% component of the 'Kerneled' Downquark at the centre.

The Mesonic Ring or KIR so defines an energy barrier at a scale of about 0.001 fm (10-18 meters) and where the inner proton exhibits its negative electric charge as the summation of 3(-1/3)=-1 partial electron charges.
The Mesonic Inner Ring so mirrors the overall +2e Kernel charge of the proton across this boundary of -e Ring charge as the 'Halo of the Proton'.
This has the same effect as one quasielectron charge of -e/3 so encompassing as the Down Quark net charge the +4e/3 doubled net charge for two Up Quarks and results in a 25%-75% net positice electric charge distribution for the proton with the 25% being located outside the wavequarkian boundary of the Mesonic Ring and the 75% inside this divide.

{Quasiparticular Electrons, Bart van Wees in 1987/University of Delft; Xiao Gang-Wen in 1989/MIT; Vladimir Goldman 1992/Stoney Brook leading to the Physics Nobelprize 1998 for Robert B. Laughlin (U.S.), Horst L. Störmer (Germany), and Daniel C. Tsui (U.S.), “for their discovery of a new form of quantum fluid with fractionally charged excitations.”}.

This is also observed for the neutron's dud central symmetry about the magnetoaxis by Gerald Millier in his linked paper following.
​
​

This linked http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0705/0705.2409v3.pdf paper is by Gerald A. Miller, a renown physicist from Washington University and is descriptive as to research of how the quark charges are distributed within the nucleons.
The paper was published in November 2007 and led to a reformulation of the original model by Enrico Fermi as to the internal charge distribution of the neutron in terms of its down-up-down quark constituents.
Fermi's model became standard in the particle physics community and envisaged a neutron containing a central positive core and a negatively charged 'skin'. This is like a negatively charged pion cloud surrounding a protonic core within the neutron; albeit rendering the neutron overall as electrically neutral. The interacting neutron physics is well understood to require a negatively charged 'envelope' to accomodate the spectras of nuclear physics.

Miller found that the neutron's central core is negatively charged, as is its long-range 'envelope', with the positive charge 'sandwiched' in between. This discovery so induces a reinterpretation of the Fermi model for the neutron.
Miller's neutron does however support the quantum geometry of Quantum Relativity with its substitution of the down-quark as a partition of a up-quark kernel surrounded by a Mesonic Inner Ring (MIR); the latter carrying integral negative charge for the d-quark's core+ring=+2/3-1=-1/3 overall fractional charge content.

As described previously, the Higgs Inertia Induction occurs at the MIR at so 2.76x10^-18 meters or at an energy level of 71 GeV. This is about one thousandth of the nuclear interaction distance of 3 fermi. As the trisected Higgs template is the same size as the Higgs Boson template and coincides with the classical electron radius and also the interaction scale of the strange quarks and the charged weakons (as the Leptonic Outer Ring or LOR); the actual interaction scale for the individual quarks should be about a third of this template in about 1 fermi.
The innermost kernel is neutrinoic-gluonic, that is it is uncharged with a lower boundary of the MIR and an upper boundary of the LOR. So Quantum Relativity also predicts that the innermost region of the nucleon will be uncharged and closely 'hugged' by a negative charge distribution at the MIR. The MIR allows oscillation to the LOR, which in matter is also negatively charged as the down-strange oscillation.
The up-quark charges so always sum to a +2 charge for any up-dow-strange configuration whatsoever, as both the down-quark and the strange-quark carry a up-quark partitioning within their rings.

So there must be a positive quark charge flux between the MIR and the LOR and this is interpreted as a longrange positive pion flux by Miller in terms of the proton with its single down quark or unitary MIR.
In terms of quantum geometry one can say, that the MIR curves inwards in a concave topological surface charge distribution and that the LOR curves outwards in convexity.
So the neutron will also carry a negatively convex charge distribution as its 'skin', being the second down quark in its oscillatory potential of transforming into a strange quark in its radioactive beta decay pattern.
The positive pion flux of the concave proton so becomes interpreted as a negative pion flux for the neutron in the transversion of the MIR scale to the LOR scale.

Another experimental result of Miller's research was the dominance of the central up-quark charge distribution over the central down-quark.
If one ignores the quarkian substructure, then one might expect similar behaviour; but knowing that the elementary quark differentiation is between unitary rings and fractional kernels; one would propose a dominance of the up-quark in the center and a dominance of the down-quark at the perimeter due to the quantum geometric alignments along say a magnetoaxis which changes the nucleon's sphericity into say a catenoidal surface topology.

Miller found a up-down ratio of 1.75:1=7/4~5/3, which indicates that the trisected ring charges in terms of gluonic colourcharges add to the kerneled colourcharge as a fractional 5/3 colourcharge near the center of a nucleon, where the colour interaction is enhanced by the attraction of Coulomb charges between oppositely charged kernel and rings.
Further away from the centre, the 'virtual' pion-flux intervenes and the maximum attraction of the MIR scale is diminished in the approaching LOR scale and the ring quarks dominate in their leptonness. This also allows the diquark structure of colour charges to dominate the electromagnetic interaction in its strongness.
The work of Gerald Miller so has shown pertinent evidence for the quantum geometry as theorized in Quantum Relativity.
Tonyblue
This is a previously shared essay analysis on subatomic physics news from shiloh and fills in some gaps in the Higgs Quantum Geometry.

In Lakech in Allisiam ​

• 
  
  
  
  
  shiloh • 33 minutes ago
  A detailed extension of the Haramein critique from Bob-A-Thon
  
• 
  http://www.cosmosdawn.net/foru...
  
  
  
  
• 
  shiloh • 35 minutes ago 
  http://www.themistsofavalon.ne...
  

[*]



https://disqus.com/by/disqus_FJ7AL25ovk/?utm_campaign=eb8f86ea-d5c0-11e4-9a45-002590f3062a&utm_content=btn&utm_source=note

https://disqus.com/home/discussion/disinfo/nassim_haramein_fraud_or_sage/#comment-1933993321
https://disqus.com/home/discussion/disinfo/nassim_haramein_fraud_or_sage/#comment-1933995577

Haramein doesn't begin speaking until 7:20, but here is a recent interview of him:

Published on Apr 8, 2015

Physicist Nassim Haramein joins Freeman and Barnet for a wild conversation about reality. This is a brilliant, pragmatic discussion, that references Nassim’s Holofractographic Universe Theory – a term that invites a new possibility for understanding reality. Is it possible that vacuum is the key to life – that all matter is appearing and disappearing at the speed of light and that we are vacuum? What if the center of every proton is a mini-black hole with nearly infinite amounts of energy? What if everything in the universe is connected at its core? Can we begin to see the fractal elements, patterns and sacred geometry in nature as a more profound illustration of who and what we really are? Beauty is the key to breaking through the confusion and contradictions that inhibits conventional thinking. “Look for beauty and you will find the truth”, tends to be the guiding principle that directed the attention of this amazing guest – and whether each of us understands the physics or not almost becomes irrelevant, the wisdom in this principle of seeking out beauty can be practically applied to all of our lives to improve life, in general.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8GpAyD93ZA

Is anyone familiar with KKCR community radio in Hawaii?

In this video, reference is made to an interview of Haramein, but I can't make out what the guy says the program was, other than KKCR, and I'm trying to validate what he says that Nassim Haramein had said in the interview:

KKCR org: http://www.kkcr.org/index.html

There is mention of a interview Nassim Haramein did on KKCR in may 2010: Grand Unified Field.

See bottom of page on the left : http://www.secoea.com/#/e-a-quantum-physics/4541031299

The archives of KKCR don't go back that far though. 

Love from me
mudra

mudra wrote:There is mention of a interview Nassim Haramein did on KKCR in may 2010: Grand Unified Field.

Thanks.

Apparently the interview was in 2014 or 2015.