ARCUS:  The World Formula and its Solutions

Consequently constructed using the results of Albert Einstein and Max Planck leading to the Unified Field Theory

The Preaching
Experiments next to the "big bang"?

Present thesis: Scientist shoot ions at each other and get energies more and more next to the apparent "big bang". While this, so-called "new particles" are observed and "proofs" are "found" confirming the hypothetical structure of matter.

My position: So how I gave the sentence above next to the present interpretations, all this is nonsense.

In the end I'll give a prediction what one will really find in these experiments.

Here are my arguments and theses, just in agreement with valid laws of nature and with present observations:

1. New particles

There aren't new particles. Matter cannot be destroyed or produced. The laws of conservation prove this (lepton conservation, baryon conservation; energy conservation).

When protons get energy, then they keep being protons, because they are identical bodies - microcosms. Though, these protons then have different energy levels (their spheres vibrate faster). We may think, there would be different particles, heavier and unstable. But only the name was changed describing this new state or level. It has remained a destabilized proton!

If the changed unstable particle decays, it does not form new particles but pairs of well-known particles. This means: the energy coming free leads to the pair forming of well-known particles. Particle pairs consist of their particles and antiparticles. If the energy is very high, the antiparticle and the particle are made in the features of unstable states, even unknown.

However, the balance of these particle pairs is zero observing the existence of pairs. Pairs are meeting themselves and radiating into pure energy, so into electromagnetic wave quanta (photons). Then the pairs are disappeared again. On the contrary way, the energies of photons form particle pairs. These are not new pairs because they don't change the total balance of particles and energy of universe! Additionally, while the decay of an unstable particle, these particle pairs don't come from the inside of the above called proton, but they are formed by interaction energies externally.

This means: When an interaction has just gone at the inside of a proton, then that energy which is set free there will be forming particle pairs at the outside, which will be a reflector of the internal relationship. So we never can make subparticles at the outside of protons directly made as result of the coming out of these particles from the inside. From the inside, nothings comes out, because particles like protons are stable black-white holes. They only let pass the surplus energies in equality or parity, which form then these particle pairs of outside world using the given particles from here at the outside. Without given particles, no particle pairs are formed (contrary thesis is not proved)! The energy is orientated always at the structure of the given particles making clones of them. From vacuum, the energy doesn't get any real mother for clones (present physics doesn't know about real vacuum, because the vacuum is filled of proton neutrinos; there they think, fluctuations of my neutrinos would be the fluctuations of physic's apparent vacuum)! Consequently, at the outside of protons one can get no protocosms of protons and also no gravitons and subtrons. Terminology of present physics speaks of quarks and of gluons. My terminology explains quarks to be energy-equivalent wave quanta, which reflect the subparticles, especially the protocosms of protons. Gluons would be then the energetic equivalents for wave-like exchange quanta of forces between the real subparticles but not between the quarks, because they are already reflections.

If scientists examine that "gluon-quark-plasma", then they observe the energy equivalents of the real subparticles. But they don't know anything about the quantity of these subparticles. Additionally, the conclusion from this to the big bang is wrong. Remark, these temperatures at which they get the information about the energy of subparticles of protons, only rule inside of the protons! Inside there - inside of the baryons - the big-bang-temperature would be given. But what is it good for? There the strongest interactions are running up to the gravitons, which pair forming temperature is next to the hypothetical big-bang-temperature.

Quantum physics has its remaining problem with its mistake describing particles and wave quanta being one single thing. Therefore they think, gluons and quarks would be particles although these phenomena are wave quanta forming real particle pairs in our outside world. Those pairs are only these well-known particles decaying into these stable particles which were injected before into a process of destabilizing.

2. Proving structure

Using wave quanta you can prove which energetic levels are inside of the protons. But you cannot say how many levels are there and where they come from if from particles or from their inner wave quanta analogously photons. It's impossible why outer reflections are analogous to photons and why they immediately form unstable particle pairs on base of well-known stable particles reflecting the inner energy level and decaying into the stable particle pairs and annihilating in the end.

Conclusion is wrong, matter had formed itself by chance from quarks and gluons. On the one hand, such an opinion is a rash conclusion. But on the other hand, you had to be able to create matter during these experiments; this means: you had to ignore conservation balance of baryons accidentally. If you could do this, such "states" could be bound or "melt together".

Who ever searches for this, if he already knows about my theories, will senselessly waste his time.

Because the real particles are that non plus ultra of balance, they (stable neutrinos, electrons and protons) cannot be produced and destroyed. Their change into unstable states is made by energy supply. Contrarily, this energy which got free while decay produces zero-balanced particle pairs being only mirror images of energy concentrations just existing in particles or in the environment of particles. I call this a kind of resonance to given oscillation energies. So every energy, programmatically given by the existence of stable particles and working between these particles (like pion energy), makes the base of reflection of features of unstable particles. While this, it doesn't remain fermions (like muons, hyperons) but also groups of particle pairs are connected to common phenomena (bosons) like mesons for example. Inside of mesons, destabilized states of electrons and positrons (these are antielectrons) are rotating around each other connected with wave quanta which make deriving an apparent resting mass. Without actions of wave quanta of gravitation, mesons would not have any rest mass, 'cause one electron from matter and one positron from antimatter compensate the rest mass into zero, logically proved by annihilation of both particles into photons without rest mass! The direct experimental proof is missing for antimass of positrons. But this experiment you cannot make with mesons and antimesons because antimesons are only apparent antis. 

3. The prediction:

The result of the scattering experiment at highest energies will be the production of a macroscopic protocosm how I describe it. This means: the complete energy of the well-known unstable particles and the given destabilized particles (no gluons, no quarks, but their energetic equivalents in the feature of the well-known particles existing now as extremely destabilized states) is connected now. In this moment, a black hole will live. Immediately, it will decay in the feature of a white hole after a small time period dependent by size (5 mm amplitude mean only twice 1.710-11 s). All the pairs will be annihilated into the energy supplied before. Remaining particles will confirm the conservation balance of matter. This event will prove my theory of forming protocosms and decay of them! All the other hypotheses about which would happen there like eating the earth by the black micro hole etc. won't be confirmed. So this will disprove old theories of presence.

All rights reserved: Arcus (Heinz-Joachim Ackermann, since1998)