TU Theory

TU TheoryThe Impossible Hole

Copyright B.J. PapenfusThe Neutron is nothing else but a gap in the lattice!!The TU Theory has undisputable proof already that the electron simply dont exist, that EM waves do not have any physical particle component, that electricity is the discharging of the of the dielectric component of EM back into the inertia plane and that the apparent observation of what we call matter is in simple terms actually space (as opposed to counterspace) and therefore just a by product of magnetism. Nothing, including time neither space (matter) or actually anything else for that matter (haha tongue twitch?) can exist without motion. All indicators in the theory points to the non presence of what the world want to so desperately believe in namely that both protons and neutrons actually exists as a type of physical particle which we can for example cut in half and then have two separate entities. The next quest in the TU theory before final publication is therefore to prove the point above, which may then even lead to the redefinition of the proton itself.

Mother nature has a tendency to design perfectly and we base our presumptions on observation and the most likely probability (haha QM has a use..lol) until proven otherwise. As the author (Barend Papenfus) of the comprehensive theory I am simply too tied up with other developments and research to tackle all the outstanding items and therefore please ask scientists (Whatever you may believe otherwise is also OK) just to do calculus and add their knowledge to whatever seems further prove or validation of the following concepts. Please bear in mind that the publication date of this document serve as proof as to the origin of the statement, however I am willing to add meaningful contributors as co-discoverers. Or just feel free to steal and run the idea if you do not think I deserve the credit for your mind spark, as long as the answers surface quickly, so that it can point mankind to the truth.

Copyright B.J. PapenfusThe Perfect designIf we are the designers of a new system and we start with the presumption that we want to fill up a box with balls of a fixed unity size, and obtain the maximum mass as output, it will obviously lead us to the smallest balls possible to manufacture. However we have a paradigm of constraint in terms of size to the smallest unity particle? we know namely the (new) proton we are designing which in fact is also the smallest magnet (generator) possible. However we have a couple of additional constraints which forces us to first design on the macroscopic level and then to progress to the final solution. The idea of this exercise is to see how close we get (By using the proposed methodology) to the current predicted VOLUME of a proton compared to measurable.Since the TU theory proved that electrons is the figment of previous generations imaginations, we are actually trying to determine the volume of influence of the 2nd level boundary layer which a TU Proton will exert in terms of its magnetic radiation. We understand in TU that a singular magnetic field will have a weaker radiation exerting pressure far exceeding its 2nd level boundary, consequently affecting its occupancy of space and therefore its perception of observable mass. A neighbouring proton however cannot compress the 2nd level radiation without severe consequences to the lattice and will cause an unbalanced system, and we are interested in studying the balanced lattice currently.We need this calculus to verify binding forces and lots of other information to actually put the PROTON itself to dust rest finally now or then eventually.

Copyright B.J. PapenfusThe 2nd dimension explanation

TU theory LAW6 states: Space will always try to balance itself by contraction due to the counter mirrored equal pressure which will be exerted by counter space, should some space be removed from the lattice.

In this 2nd dimension example system (ignore the box z vectors) Space is defined as the area inside the box. Outside of the box is nothing or what is then referred to as counter space. it means that should the centre ball be removed as indicated it will create the impossible Hole requirement perfectly because of the Kissing number design of 6 balls TOUCHING the centre ball.

It should know be clear that if the balls is actually protons (Influence spheres) this removed area can never be FILLED simply due to lattice constraints.6 root vectors of radiation Force each equal to 1/6 th Space each now constantly act upon this impossible Hole since the system receives induced stress from counter space. Neutrons constitutes a low pressure region in the lattice.

This is the definition of a Neutron according to the TU theory and resolves lots of reasons as to why protons are neutral yet have such strong bonding properties. The measured mass of a proton should therefore correlate with the reflected mass components of the root vectors.

Copyright B.J. Papenfus3rd Dimension NeutronIn three dimensions, the kissing number is 12, but the correct value was much more difficult to establish than in dimensions one and two. It is easy to arrange 12 spheres so that each touches a central sphere, but there is a lot of space left over, and it is not obvious that there is no way to pack in a 13th sphere. (In fact, there is so much extra space that any two of the 12 outer spheres can exchange places through a continuous movement without any of the outer spheres losing contact with the center one.) This was the subject of a famous disagreement between mathematicians Isaac Newton and David Gregory. Newton correctly thought that the limit was 12; Gregory thought that a 13th could fit. Some incomplete proofs that Newton was correct were offered in the nineteenth century, but the first correct proof (according to Brass, Moser, and Pach) did not appear until 1953.[1][2]The twelve neighbors of the central sphere correspond to the maximum bulk coordination number of an atom in a crystal lattice in which all atoms have the same size (as in a chemical element). A coordination number of 12 is found in a cubic close-packed or a hexagonal close-packed structure

A nice way to obtain this arrangement on the next page is by aligning the centers of outer spheres with vertices of an icosahedron. This would leave just a bit more than 0.1 of the radius between two nearby spheres. This is exactly the requirement for free migration of proton flow around the neutron and corresponds to frictional kinetic velocity absorption properties unless you can prove otherwise.Basic calculus as a starting point can be found in Wikipedia.

Copyright B.J. PapenfusThe neutron Caught inside an Impossible Hole.

Copyright B.J. Papenfus