Particle Consistency of Microscopic and Macroscopic Motion Yongfeng Yang Bureau of Water Resources of Shandong Province, Jinan, Shandong Province, China, Mailing address: Shandong Water Resources Department, No. 127 Lishan Road, Jinan, Shandong Province, China, 250014 Tel. and fax: +86-531-8697-4362 E-mail: roufengyang@gmail.com Abstract The scenario of particle has been greatly written in the past, but its incompleteness is so serious that the connection of microscopic and macroscopic world is broken. The 19 th century s experiment by both Perrin and Thomson is unable to prove whether the cathode rays are negatively charged or not. Here we propose, the particles of an atom are organized in a series of hierarchical two-body systems to orbit, wave-like movement demonstrated in double-slit experiment is nothing but an aggregation of the movement of many fine particles. Along with previous work, it is hopeful to see that hierarchical two-body gravitation may unify different level structures and their motion together. 1 Introduction Some conceptions of microscopic particles had been founded in the past. For instance, electron is negatively charged and proton is positively charged, and the number of electron and proton of an atom is equal, the atom is neutral. There are four kinds of interactions: electromagnetic force, weak force, strong force, and gravity force, the electrons and protons of an atom are attracted with electromagnetic force, and the electrons in one atom are also attracted to the protons in another with electromagnetic force, strong force binds all the protons (including quarks) of an atom together, weak force is responsible for the decay of massive quarks and leptons into lighter quarks and leptons, gravity force is weak and relevant at large distance. But not all of these conceptions are complete or reliable in both theory and experiment. Question 1 A celestial object may be treated as a large aggregation of countless atoms (this point is presently certain), and in its body each atom is adjacent to other atoms. If the electrons in one atom are attracting the protons in another with electromagnetic force, all the atoms of a celestial object may attract each other to fix together, it is unnecessary to introduce gravity force to bind all the materials (aggregation of atoms) of that celestial object together. But experience tells us that it appears to be gravity force rather than other force to bind all the materials together. On the other hand, if the electromagnetic force between the electrons of one atom and the protons of another atom is existed, the electrons in motion can repeatedly approach and depart from the protons of another atom, this is a motion in variable electromagnetic field, the conversion of kinetic energy and potential energy and its consumption will lead to an instability of the two atoms. Question 2 C. F. du Fay in 1733 showed a two-fluid theory of vitreous and resinous electricity, but in 1839 Michael Faraday showed the division of static electricity, current electricity, and bioelectricity was only a consequence of 1
the behavior of a single kind of electricity appearing in opposite polarities. It is completely arbitrary which polarity is called positive and which is called negative. It is Benjamin Franklin who later posited that when matter contained too little of the fluid it was "negatively" charged, and when it had an excess it was "positively" charged, and further identified the term "positive" with vitreous electricity and "negative" with resinous electricity. It may conclude that the arbitrary term positive and negative charge has no any real physical meaning. So, there is no reason to conclude that the mutual interaction between negatively charged electrons and positively charged protons in an atom may get the atom become electrically neutral. On the other hand, proton is proved to be composed of smaller elementary particles, and electron is also one of many elementary particles, it is very difficult to imagine why the magnitude of electric charge hold by electron and proton is always equal when these elementary particles are organized to form an atom. No physical reason may be found to approve this property of equality. Question 3 Also the most importantly, it is uncertain that the particles of the cathode rays are negatively electrified. In 1897, Thomson made the experiment of cathode rays as shown in Figure 1. The rays from the cathode C pass through a first slit in the anode A and a second slit in another earth-connected metal plug B, subsequently, they then travel between two parallel aluminium plates (about 5 cm. long by 2 broad and at a distance of 1.5 cm. apart); they then fall on the end of the tube and produce a narrow well-defined phosphorescent patch. The rays were deflected when the two aluminium plates were connected with the terminals of a battery of small storage cells; the rays were depressed when the upper plate was connected with the negative pole of the battery, the lower with the positive, and raised when the upper plate was connected with the positive, the lower with the negative pole. Based on these observations, Thomson concluded that the corpuscles --particles are negatively charged. Figure 1: Model of Thomson s experiment of cathode rays. The particles of cathode rays are emitted from the cathode C to pass two slits A and B subsequently, and then pass through an electrostatic field D and E, by which the particles of cathode rays is deflexed. It appears to be difficult to disprove the result of the experiment, but it does not mean that the experiment is complete. The experiment of electricity through metal conductor shows that the moving electrons create current, and the electrons move from the cathode of an electric source to the anode. This further indicates that the electrons have trend to escape from the anode of an electric source under the effect of potential difference. Once the anode and cathode of an electric source is connected with a metal wire, the electrons will immediately move along the wire. In Thomson s experiment, some electrons might have moved from the battery to the plate connected at the cathode and then escaped from the plate. The ejected electrons could collide with the passing cathode rays and thereby arouse them to deflex. We here have to pay more attention to the details of Thomson s experiment. Thomson employed a battery of small storage cells whose potential difference is low, the two plates are near that is 2
apart at a distance of 1.5 cm, the aluminium plate is about 5 cm. long by 2 broad. These conditions determine if some electrons (or other fine particles) are emitted from the plate connected with the cathode, the electron density per unit area from the plate (relative to the dense cathode rays) is too less to arouse experimenter to note that these electrons are passing between the two plates. The direction of current is generally thought to be run from the anode of an electric source to the cathode, but inversely, the movement of electrons is proved to be from the cathode to the anode. It is possible that the direction of electron movement and current is thought by Thomson to be identical, and may thus mislead his experimental result. In fact, Thomson s experiment is to reinforce the view of Jean Perrin that the cathode rays are charged with negative electricity. Perrin in 1895 had made the experiment of cathode rays as shown in Figure 2. The particles of cathode rays (marked with orange lines) are emitted from the cathode N to pass two openings β and α subsequently, and then enter the inner Faraday s cylinder. The electroscope connected with the cylinder then indicates negative electricity. However, this experiment cannot prove that the cathode rays are negatively charged. The Faraday cylinder Perrin employed is metal material, and it is well established that there are free electrons in metal material, so when the particles of cathode rays are emitted from the cathode to enter the Faraday s cylinder, they can inevitably bombard the free electrons of the Faraday's cylinder to move, the moving electrons may form current and therefore be detected by the electroscope connected with the cylinder. Because the movement of electrons is reverse to the direction of current, the electroscope in Perrin s experiment may therefore indicate negative electricity. Today this evidence virtually does not need to argue too much, photoelectric effect had shown that the photons of a beam of light can bombard a metal s surface to release electrons. This means very small particles may bombard the free electrons of a metal to move. It is necessary to remind that in both Perrin and Thomson s experiment they used magnetic field to deflex the cathode rays, this phenomenon of deflexion may be explained as a consequence of magnetic particle colliding the cathode rays. Figure 2: Model of Perrin s experiment of cathode rays. The vacuum tube is represented by A B C D, which plays the part of a Faraday's cylinder. A metal thread soldered at S connects this cylinder with an electroscope. E F G H is a second cylinder in permanent communication with the earth. The proposed electrons (marked with green dots) are being bombarded to move. 2 Proposition How do the particles of an atom move in space? The term spin is nothing but an arbitrary description of the movement of these particles. So far, nobody has in person seen an actual motion of electron around the nucleus of an atom, the veil of atom is still deeply covered. If electron is proved to be neutral, as atom is observed to be neutral, proton must be neutral, the strong force between protons must be inexistent, the electromagnetic force between the electrons and protons of an atom must be inexistent, the electromagnetic force between the electrons of an atom and the protons of another atom must be inexistent, etc. Experiment has proven that proton is divisible and composed of smaller elementary particles, and many other elementary particles had also been discovered. All 3
these aspects inspire one to think what is responsible for the association of these particles and their motion. In another previous paper, I have theoretically formulated that all particles due to random perturbation continue to capture each other with gravitation to form larger hierarchical two-body systems like planet, star, galaxy, cluster, and etc. [1]. Here I further specify this process in microscopic scale. Due to random perturbation from another unknown matter, the elementary particles in motion have chance to approach each other. Once the distance of the two particles is near enough, gravity fixes them together to form a two-body system. Due to the distribution of elementary particles are extensive in space, many two-body systems of particles are formed at the same time. Due to random perturbation, these two-body systems of particles and individual particles continue to approach each other and further capture to form superior two-body systems of particles. The superior two-body systems of particles and individual particles continue to approach each other and further capture to form very superior two-body systems of particles. We assume these very superior two-body systems of particles to be atoms. Subsequently, atoms and particles due to random perturbation continue to capture each other to form individual celestial objects, and then these celestial objects continue to capture each other to form planetary systems, stellar systems, etc. (Fig.3). Figure 3: Model of association of elementary particles. In atom the color dots denote elementary particles and their associations. Arrows denote the motional directions of each component, black dots denote the barycenter of related two-body systems, while black lines denote gravitation between the components of these two-body systems. As all the particles are organized together through a pattern of one to one, a series of hierarchical two-body systems are determined for the particles of an atom. Due to the pattern of one to one, light element is firstly formed from elementary particles, and then light elements and individual particles further capture each other to form heavier elements. Under the effect of gravitation, the two components of each two-body system are approaching increasingly. A successive hierarchical two-body approach leads the particles of an atom to further aggregate, a nucleus may be formed at a central region of the atom. In atom, each particle is orbiting around the barycenter of a two-body system, and at the same time the two-body system itself is orbiting around the barycenter of a superior two-body system. As the nucleus of an atom is massive, the barycenters of related two-body systems are determined to be close to the nucleus, the outer particles therefore look like orbiting around the nucleus, which is 4
similar to the solar system that the planets look like orbiting around the Sun. The approach of particles may lead to collide, the collision of particles may thus lead heavier element to radiate rays and become decay. 3 A particle s explanation of double-slit experiment The most famous experiment to prove the property of particle to be wave is double-slit interference experiment. But this wave is essentially an aggregation of the movement of many fine particles. As shown in Figure 4, we at first assumed that particle emission from a source is by group and the time interval of two adjacent groups is too less to be distinguished by established technique. Let all the groups of particles pass through slit a in board S 1 subsequently. Theoretically speaking, the width of slit is far larger than the size of individual particle. After the slit, the first group of particles due to a compression with the slit and themselves will immediately release into a large space and thereby spread out forward, the second, third, fourth, etc. groups of particles will subsequently release and spread out forward. The spread of particles is like a sphere-layer pattern. And then, the first group of particles reach board S 2 where there are two slits b and c. Some of the particles are again compressed to pass through the two slits. After the two slits, the two subordinate groups of particles will again release into large space and spread out forward. The following subordinate groups of particles from later groups will subsequently release and spread out forward. In motion, a subordinate group of particles from one slit will geometrically intersect with other subordinate groups of particles from another slit. For instance, subordinate group b 1 from slit b can intersect with group c 1, c 2, etc. from slit c. Now if we set a screen (F) in the front of their travel, the intersections of the subordinate groups of particles will automatically fall on the screen. An intersection of particles means there are more particles in the intersection region than other non-intersection region. So, when all the intersections fall on the screen, a series of patches of particles may be formed. If the particles we employ here are photons, the experiment of double-slit interference may finally be explained as a consequence of the aggregating movement of fine particles. Figure 4: A particle s explanation of double-slit interference experiment. K 1 (K 2 ) denotes the intersection of two subordinate groups of particles where there are more particles than other region. 5
4 Discussion Thomson employed an electrostatic field to deflex the cathode rays, but we should mind a fact that the electrostatic field is determined by an electric source, and that the two polarities (anode and cathode) of the electric source are being connected with two plates to create the electrostatic field. As electrons always move from the cathode of an electric source to the anode, this means that some kind of matter is passing between the two plates to create the electrostatic field. It may infer that this kind of matter is either electrons or other fine particles that are bombarded by electrons to eject from the plate. If someone attempts to prove the cathode rays to be negatively charged, he should use a plate coated with the so-called positive charge to approach the cathode rays to see whether the rays can be deflexed. Ernest Rutherford in 1910 used Helium nuclei to bombard a piece of gold foil to show that the majority of an atom s body is empty, except for a small but dense nucleus at the center. This further means that there is huge void between any two adjacent atoms. In a galaxy, there is also large void between any two adjacent stellar systems (stars), but the mass of each stellar system is mainly focused at a small central region. Stellar system is composed of many small components like star, planet, and satellite, and atom is also composed of many small components like electron, proton, and neutron. This semblable property requires us to think that they are likely to derive from the same physical reason. If proposition above is reliable, the atomic solar system s model is still available. Like the solar system, the shape of atom should be flat. Some people are trying to unify theory of relativity and quantum mechanics to form a final paradigm, but it is difficult to see a hope if they rely on these established but still incomplete stories. Evidently, clusters of galaxies is an aggregation of galaxies, galaxy is an aggregation of stellar systems, stellar system is an aggregation of a star and planetary systems, planetary system is an aggregation of a planet and satellites, star, planet, and satellite are respectively an aggregation of atoms, and atom is an aggregation of elementary particles, the components of each level are in motion at the same time. Any attempt that neglects this hierarchy of matter and motion to unify microscopic and macroscopic world is impossible to be successful. If elementary particles are the bricks, a hierarchical two-body capture is the best way to build these bricks to form large structures, and then all the structures are inevitably organized in a series of hierarchical two-body systems to orbit. As force is the reason of motion and motion is the result of force, this naturally requires a hierarchical two-body gravitation to fit to these structures and their movements. Not all visible matter have the characteristic of electromagnetism, but all invisible matter may be thought to be with mass, this means that all visible matter may be ruled by a commonly physical mechanism, therefore it is feasible to treat electromagnetism as a special property of some kind of matter. And then, all visible matter and their motion may be written into a final frame of gravitation. Reference: [1] Yang, Y. F., Motions of Observable Structures Ruled by Hierarchical Two-Body Gravitation in the Universe. Proceedings of the 18th annual conference of the NPA, College Park, Maryland University, USA, Vol.8: 712-721 (2011). 6