The Structure of Elementary Particles: Preon Model #3

DRAFT 19May2013

The Structure of Elementary Particles: Preon Model #3

 Abstract

1. Structures of elementary particles as combinations of preons are suggested in this paper. The model used is a modification of the Rishon preon model by elimination of the zero electric charge preon which has been replaced by two oppositely electrically charged preons.  Non-mathematical inferences have been used to suggest that the smallest elementary particles (electron, photon, neutrino, quarks) are composed of 24 preons.  Each preon appears to be a string and resides on one colour charge brane.   There are two types of preon in the model, one with left-handed chirality and one with right-handed chirality. Each preon type can, by an observer effect, seem to have an anti-matter version making it appear that there are four types of preons.  Gluons have 96 and 192 preons while the W and Z particles have 48 preons each.  The light Higgs of mass 125 GeV/c2 has 96 preons, the same as seven of the eight gluons.  These gluons are identified as being one higgs, apparently dressed in different disguises, as any of the seven gluons can be formed from one single higgs particle.  The eighth gluon is identified with a 2-higgs structure.  A suggested dark matter particle has 24 preons.  Every elementary particle has an equal mix of matter and antimatter, so there is no missing antimatter in the universe and positrons are no more travelling backwards in time than are electrons.  All particles have half of their preons travelling forwards and half travelling backwards in time.  The electron and quarks are suggested to have closed and twisting triple-helix structures containing open-ended strings/preons embedded in three different 4D colour branes.  Photons have closed loops of counter-rotating preons enabling the photon to have linear speed c and spin 1.  Neutrinos have open-ended but counter-rotating strings which allow linear speed c, but produce a spin ½ fermion.

Preons

2.  In this preon model, there are two different types of preon:  L and R.  Each preon  has an antimatter version: L’ and R’. The L preon has  left-handed chirality and is rotating with tangential speed c and the R preon has right-handed chirality, and they produce negative electric charge [-1/24] and positive electric charge [+1/24], respectively.  The antimatter preons are travelling in the opposite time direction to the matter preons, and as a consequence their helicity, to an observer, is a reverse of the intrinsic chirality.  So L‘ appears to us to be right-handed, with charge +1/24 and R‘ appears to be left-handed with charge -1/24.  Each preon has a single colour (or anticolour) charge and is attached only to a brane of that colour.

Preon content of elementary particles

3.  The numbers and types of preons in elementary particles is the most confident supposition in this model, especially for the lighter elementary particles (Table 1).  The numbers for the heavier members in families of particles, such as muon and tauon are unclear.

Table 1             The numbers and types of preons in elementary particles

Particle

Number of preons and electric charge sign

L (-)

L’  (+)

R (+)

R’ (-)

electron

12

0

0

12

antiup quark

10

2

2

10

down quark

8

4

4

8

antidown quark

4

8

8

4

up quark

2

10

10

2

positron

0

12

12

0

photon (=  antiphoton)

6

6

6

6

neutrino (=  antineutrino)

6

6

6

6

Z

12

12

12

12

W-

18

6

6

18

W+

6

18

18

6

Gluon

24

24

24

24

Higgs

24

24

24

24

The photon and neutrino have the same preon content as each other but the different pairing arrangements of the preons produce different properties.  The pairing pattern of preons in elementary particles (Table 2) is vital in determining particle properties, and an explanation is give in para.7.

Table 2     Patterns of pairings of preons in elementary particles

Particle

Pattern of preon pairing

electron

(LR’)(LR’)(LR’)(LR’)(LR’)(LR’)(LR’)(LR’)(LR’)(LR’)(LR’)(LR’)

antiup quark

(L’R) – (LR’)(LR’)(LR’)(LR’)(LR’)(LR’)(LR’)(LR’)(LR’)(LR’) – (L’R)

down quark

(L’R)(L’R) – (LR’)(LR’)(LR’)(LR’)(LR’)(LR’)(LR’)(LR’) – (L’R) (L’R)

antidown quark

(LR’)(LR’) – (L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R) – (LR’)(LR’)

up quark

(LR’) – (L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R) – (LR’)

positron

(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)

photon = antiphoton

(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’) – (RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)

neutrino = antineutrino

(LR)(LR)(LR)(LR)(LR)(LR) – (L’R’)(L’R’)(L’R’)(L’R’)(L’R’)(L’R’)

Z     = γ + γ

(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’) – (RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)

W-  = up ‘ +  down

{ (L’R) – (LR’)(LR’)(LR’)(LR’)(LR’)(LR’)(LR’)(LR’)(LR’)(LR’) – (L’R) } {  (L’R)(L’R) – (LR’)(LR’)(LR’)(LR’)(LR’)(LR’)(LR’)(LR’) – (L’R) (L’R) } ?

W+ = up + down’

{ (LR’) – (L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R) – (LR’) }  { (LR’)(LR’) –  (L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R) – (LR’)(LR’) } ?

Gluon                (LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’) – (RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)

Higgs                (LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’)(LL’) – (RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)

The patterns for the pairings of preons in fermions are (LR’) and/or (L’R).  The pairings for the photon, and bosons, are (LL’) and (RR’).  The pairings for the neutrino are (LR) and (L’R’).  The pairings for W- and W+ are less certain as they are bosons but cannot be paired as bosons in this model because of inequality in the numbers of preons in each type of preon.  The Higgs and gluons have the same preon contents as each other.

4.  The composition of particles  in terms of preon types and pairings are shown in another summary form in Table 3.

Table 3     Preon numbers and pairings

Particle

(LR’)

(L’R)

(LL’)

(RR’)

(LR)

(L’R’)

electron

12

  0

antiup quark

10

  2

down quark

  8

  4

dark matter?  (see para. 17)

  6

  6

antidown quark

  4

  8

up quark

  2

10

positron

  0

12

photon  (=  antiphoton)

  6

  6

neutrino (= antineutrino)

  6

  6

Z     = γ + γ

24

24

Gluon

48

48

Higgs

48

48

Speculation about possible pairings:

W-    = up‘ + down

  12 ?

  0 ?

6 ?

6 ?

W+   = up  + down ‘

    0 ?

12 ?

6 ?

6 ?

Muon

24 ?

12 ?

Tauon

36 ?

24 ?

strange

20 ?

16 ?

charm

14 ?

22 ?

bottom

32 ?

28 ?

top

26 ?

34 ?

muon ν

18 ?

18 ?

tauon ν

30 ?

30 ?

(LR’)

(L’R)

(LL’)

(RR’)

(LR)

(L’R’)

The possible structures of the more massive members of families are tentatively included in Table 3 (see para. 18).  And the inclusion of a dark matter candidate is even more speculative (para. 17).

Electric charges of particles

5.  The L preon has an electric charge of -1/24.  R’ has electric charge -1/24.   So the electron has charge 24 * -1/24 = -1.

The L’ preon has electric charge +1/24. R has electric charge +1/24.  So the positron has charge 24 * 1/24 = +1.

The electric charges of all the above particles match their known electric charges.

Colour charges of particles

6.  Every preon is a string associated to a colour brane so the above structures can be extended in notation to include colour.  This is done by showing preons in Table 4 on line 1 and their colour charges (red, green and blue) on line 2.   Where r’ denotes a single antired preon and also, for example, where (bg) and (gb) are preon pairs which are net antired colour pairs.

Table 4     Preon pairings and colour charges

electron

 (LR’)(LR’) (LR’) (LR’)(LR’) (LR’) (LR’)(LR’)  (LR’) (LR’)(LR’) (LR’)

(r’g’)(r’b’)(g’r’)(g’b’)(b’r’)(b’g’) (g’r’)(b’r’)(r’g’)(b’g’)(r’b’)(g’b’)

antired antiup quark

(L’R) – (LR’) (LR’)(LR’) (LR’)(LR’) (LR’) (LR’)(LR’) (LR’) (LR’) –  (L’R)

(gb) –  (r’b’)(g’r’)(r’g’)(b’r’)(b’g’)(g’r’)(r’b’)(r’g’)(g’b’)(b’r’) –  (bg)

red down quark

(L’R)(L’R) – (LR’) (LR’)(LR’) (LR’) (LR’) (LR’)(LR’) (LR’) – (L’R)(L’R)

(rg) (rb) –   (g’r’)(g’b’)(b’r’)(b’g’)(b’g’)(r’b’)(r’g’)(g’b’) –  (br) (gr)

dark matter?  (see para. 17)

 (LR’)(LR’) (LR’) (LR’) (LR’) (LR’) – (L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)

(r’g’) (r’b’)(g’r’) (g’b’)(b’r’)(b’g’) – (gr) (br) (rg) (bg) (rb) (gb)

antired antidown quark

(LR’)(LR’) – (L’R) (L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R) – (LR’)(LR’)

(r’g’)(r’b’) – (gr) (gb)  (br)  (bg) (gr)  (rb) (rg) (gb)  – (b’r’)(b’g’)

red up quark

(LR’) -(L’R)(L’R) (L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)- (LR’)

(g’b’) -(rb) (gr)  (rg)   (br)  (bg) (gr)  (rb) (rg) (gb)  (br) –  (b’g’)

positron

(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)

(rg)  (rb) (gr)  (gb) (br) (bg) (gr)  (br)  (rg) (bg) (rb) (gb)

photon  (=  antiphoton)

(LL’)(LL’)(LL’) (LL’)(LL’)(LL’) – (RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)(RR’)

(r’r)(g’g)(b’b)(r’r)(g’g)(b’b) – (rr’) (gg’) (bb’) (rr’) (gg’) (bb’)

neutrino (=  antineutrino)

                                          EITHER

(LR)(LR) (LR) (LR) (LR)(LR) – (L’R’)(L’R’)(L’R’)(L’R’)(L’R’)(L’R’)

(r’r)(g’g)(b’b)(r’r)(g’g)(b’b) – (rr’) (gg’) (bb’)  (rr’) (gg’) (bb’)

                                             OR

(LR)(LR) (LR) (LR) (LR)(LR) – (L’R’)(L’R’)(L’R’)(L’R’)(L’R’)(L’R’)

(r’g)(g’b)(b’r)(r’b)(g’r)(b’g) – (rg’) (gr’) (br’)  (rb’) (gb’) (bg’)

The red down quark can be described by starting with the electron structure but then swapping the two end pairs of preons for two positron pairs.  To be clearer, at one end an (LR’)(LR’) from an electron is swapped for an (L’R)(L’R) from a positron. And the same procedure is carried out at the other end of the starting electron.  Where the preon end colours were (r’g’)(r’b’) in the electron they are now (rg)(rb) in the quark. And at the other end they would be in colours (gr)(br).  The pair (rg) is of net colour antiblue.  {The pair (rg) is equivalent to colour g’b’r’b’, i.e. b’(r’g’b’), i.e. antiblue, as r’g’b’ is neutral in colour.}  The pair (rb) is therefore equivalent to antigreen.  The end (rg)(rb) is therefore equivalent to b’g’, i.e. to red.  So the quark ends are red.  Also the centre of the quark is lacking in the opposite colour, i.e. it is lacking in antired.  That is equivalent to the middle also having a red colour charge.

The red antiup quark structure can also be described starting with the electron structure but, at each end of the starting electron, one pair of preons is swapped for a positron pair.  So at one end an (LR’) is replaced by an (L’R), i.e. colour (g’b’) is replaced by (gb).  And at the other end a (b’g’) is replaced by a (bg).  So each end has an antired, and each middle is deficient in red, which is equivalent to an excess of antired in the middle.

Design of the model

7.  The first draft model had the same preon types as the final model but had only two preons in an electron and two in a photon and so the electric charges of particles in that draft model could not meet requirements.  That model gave the idea for pairing preons such that an electron was matter, a positron was antimatter and a photon was a mixture of matter and antimatter, but the final model does not have that feature either.  A feature that has been retained from the first draft is that a particle’s light speed was attained by two preons of opposite handedness being paired together, and the propulsion gained from that pairing by analogy with the best pairing of speed boat propellers being of counter-rotating screws.  So L paired with L’ could give speed c, but also L paired with R could give speed c, whereas L paired with R’ would turn in circles.  Any unpaired preon would also turn in circles.  Two different pairings of preons giving speed c was useful as two different types of particle have speed c: the photon and neutrino.

The Rishon preon model gave a starting point of six preons in an electron and quark so as to assign electric charge correctly to particles.  There seemed to be no advantage, however, of using the Rishon spinless preon.  Chiral preons are assumed, in Model #3, to be required in order to create particle fields.  That still left it possible to account fully for electric charges of the particles.  The down quark could be made from six preons as one pair of (LR’) preons could be replaced by one (L’R) pair. That leaves a correct electrical charge.  This was not sufficient, however, as one could not take and replace one single preon from an electron to make an antiup quark without destroying the pairing method.    That is, an electron would have been: (LR’)(LR’)(LR’) and would have needed either an L to be replaced by an L’ or an R’ to be replaced by an R, which is an ambiguity which would mean that there could have been two different forms of the same quark.  So to avoid that ambiguity, the number of preons per particle had to be doubled to 12 preons in six pairs.  That enabled all the quarks to be constructed with correct electrical charge and at the same time preserving preon pairings and removing an ambiguity.

The next step was to recognise that it was a requirement that any particle must be constructed in only one way, including the colour charge content.   Again, it was the up and antiup quarks causing the problem.  Should the swapped pair of preons, to make the end antired preons of an antired antiup quark, be a replacement of a (b’g’) by a (bg) or should (g’b’)  be replaced by (gb)?  The solution was again to double the number of preons in a particle, to 24, and replace both (b’g’) and (g’b’)  by (bg) and (gb), respectively, and so make a unique up quark design.

Preons as strings

8.  In this model, preons have no mass.  They rotate with tangential speed c and they have a chiral structure.  That means that they are required to have content.  With a preon model, all the particles in the universe can be analysed into preons.  But those preons could, if it were possible to do so, also be analysed into sub-preons.  Sub-preons would be preons of a fractal order smaller.  A preon is assumed to be like a universe and analysable into preons as is a universe.  If the universe had a chirality then it would be even more like a preon.  This is a pseudo fractal structure only: ‘pseudo’ because there is no expectation of matching structures exactly between fractal orders of scale, i.e. between preons and sub-preons.

Strings travel at or close to speed c, and can have a spin.  In para. 12, speculations are made about particle structures, that is, into what shapes the preons are arranged.  It was at this point in development of the model when preons were realised to be strings as the preons seemed to act as open strings in the fermions and as closed strings in the photon and open strings in the neutrino.  Further, the model was designed using preons alone but, when trying to see the shapes of structures, it seemed that coloured branes were also required.  It seems that the branes are the extra dimensions that come with the preons and one cannot have a preon or string without its habitat of higher dimensionality.

Preons move always at speed c.  Particles always contain pairs of preons and the pairing of preons affects the particle speed.  A static particle does not have its preons at reduced speeds as preons always retain speed c.

An (LR), or an (L’R’), pairing of preons travels at a linear speed c by analogy with a speed boat which has efficient forward drive with two counter-rotating propellers.  (Neutrino)

An (LL’), or an (RR’), pairing of preons travels at a linear speed c by analogy with a speed boat which has efficient forward drive with two counter-rotating propellers.  (Photon)

A (LR’) pairing of preons travels in circles with tangential speed c by analogy with a speed boat which will turn in circles if it has two same-rotating propellers, and no rudder.  (Electron)

A (L’R) pairing of preons travels in circles with tangential speed c in the opposite handedness to the previous pairing. (Positron)

Emergent mass of particles

9.  Preons have no mass.  The photon and neutrino have no mass because their preons move at linear speed c.  The electron has mass through inertia.  The combination of an electron’s preons into pairs has given the electron a spinning motion where the preons are chasing their own tails in tight circles. That is the same type of spinning as a speedboat moving in tight circles.  That spinning motion will give the electron inertia: a tendency to stay where it is in space if not acted upon by other fields.

In virtual particle production, virtual particles can have a reduced, off-shell mass.  For example, a higgs mass of ~125 GeV/c2 has been described as a sum of masses of an on-shell Z particle mass plus an off-shell Z particle mass, the latter for example existing in the energy of say a Z’s two component fermions.  If elementary particles are recombining into different virtual particles, then their preons are dissociating and recombining and, when dissociating, some preon pairings may dissociate into pairs of preons which do not give rise to mass and so the virtual particles may not achieve their on-shell mass before dissociating again.

Preons in any particle must be able to engage with a static higgs field in the vacuum, but not necessarily only with the light higgs recently discovered, in order to be able to move in tight circles.  Also, in order to move linearly at speed c, preons must likewise be able to engage with a higgs-like field.

Spin and charge of particles

10.  Ohanian, in 1985, resurrected an idea by Belinfante that spin may be generated by a circulating flow of charge in a wave field.  This tentatively reasonably fits the preon model  as every preon has a charge of either + or – 1/24 and every preon is moving at speed c and its contents provide the preon fields and its particle’s field.

Charge has been described in this model as an intrinsic property of the preon but, like mass, it may be an emergent property derived from the more fundamental chirality and time direction of the preon.  A matter preon has a time direction pointing in parallel to that of the universe while an antimatter preon has an internal time direction which is in the opposite direction.   So a matter preon would be built the same way as an antimatter preon but an observer would see the antimatter preon moving backward in our time.  Well, an observer could not actually see the antimatter preon travelling backward in time as we only detect particles.  And all particles are made of an equal number of matter preons and antimatter preons, so all particles are net neutral with respect to their time directions.  These time directions seem to peacefully coexist within a particle, rather than annihilating, or else we would never detect any particle.

In quantum mechanics the spin of two particles may be entangled.  Although there is no general agreement with the existence of hidden variables, Joy Christian has used Clifford Algebra to show that such entanglement depends upon hidden variables, such that there is no need for communication between remote, entangled particles to decide jointly at the last moment which particle spins which way.  Any such outcome is carried as a hidden variable within each separate particle. That idea has enabled the production of this model as it seemed possible to try to design a structure which had the means to carry a hidden variable, whereas it seems too daunting to try to devise a structure with a spooky entanglement.  That means that this model is a structure which is a Lego-type assemblage of components where the components, their arrangements, their internal spacetimes, dimensions and fields and sub-components were complex enough to carry a hidden variable.  Though the nature of the intrinsic, hidden spin variable is still hidden from the author in terms of a concrete constructional feature.

This paper is not mathematical and therefore not physics.  Christian’s work has encouraged the idea that there could be an underlying exact structure for which raw measurements are not available to us, only summary statistics.  The particle has an exact structure which determines its spin, but that spin is not known to us except at a measurement, i.e. the particle has a hidden variable.  An analogy is in trying to write someone’s biography when the only evidence available is the birth, marriage and death certificates. Those events are like particle interactions where measurements are possible.  Knowing a person’s full life story would require detailed information of unmeasured events.  This corresponds to a particle’s wave behaviour which occurs between measurements.   It seems that a full biography is unrealisable and attempting to put a shape on the particle models in the following paragraphs is therefore more speculative that the counting of the frequencies of the different types of preons.

Spin and charge are properties which seem to be intrinsic to each preon or emerge from each preon,  and a particle’s charge and spin are aggregated from the constituent preons’ charges and spins.  Also, these properties depend on the dynamic behaviour of a preon: the preon has internal content moving at speed c and it possibly undergoes inflation after a measurement and a wave collapse just before the point of measurement.  Such dynamism, combined with a chiral structure, is assumed to create field effects.

The same preons can come together in different pairings to form either the photon (spin 1) or the neutrino (spin 1/2).  The implication of that is that the spin of a particle is not an intrinsic property of the preons but an emergent property of the particle.  That fits well with the spin depending on the particle speed reaching c or not, which is dependent upon the preon pairing pattern.  The electric charge of a particle is a simple sum of the individual charges on the constituent preons which could make electric, and colour, charge an intrinsic property of the particle and its preons.  That assumes it was correct initially to assign fixed electric and colour charges to preons, where (a) the electric charge of a preon depended on its helicity, i.e.  how the intrinsic  chirality appeared to an observer, and (b) the colour charge was intrinsic as it depended on which unique colour dimensions a preon inhabited.

Electron structure

11.  In this model, the electron does not lack colour charge but it is symmetric with respect to colour charge.  An electron has 24 preons each with electric charge -1/24.  There are 8 preons for each of the three anti-colour charges, which makes the electron neutral in colour charge on aggregate.  The electron model has to use those colour charge dimensions: the colour charge represents hidden dimensions and hidden dimensions cannot be ignored even though it makes it almost impossible for the author to visualise.  Further, the colour charge attractions between constituent preons have the function of glue in building the model and hence are vital ingredients.

Strings in a fermion are open-ended, so a starting point for an electron structure is 24 open-ended strings/preons.  Eight antired preons are attached, at one end of each preon only, to the red brane.  The red brane is imagined as a single supporting red upright of a ladder, which has eight antired rungs or preons attached to it.  There is also a blue upright with eight antiblue rungs/preons and likewise for green.  This is three sets of 4D spacetimes, one for each colour.

The three coloured branes (or ladder uprights) are united into a triple helix.  At one end of the helix, there is an antired preon attracted to an antiblue preon by colour charge force, i.e. there is an (r’b’) pairing at one end of the triple helix.  The two preons can move to be together at or before their open ends.   An analogy is the double helix of DNA where say A is attracted to T at one end of the double helix forming an (AT) pairing.   In a double helix  of DNA, a sequence can be built up: say (AT) (CG) (TA) etc.  In a triple helix, a sequence could be say (r’b’)(r’g’)(b’g’) etc.   This could first be seen as a triangular prism of a ladder with three uprights, but the rungs are preons with speed c and chirality.  And all 24 preons have the same chirality which means that they all twist the uprights the same way, say anticlockwise.  That will tend to twist each of the three uprights anticlockwise, which changes a triangular prism into a triple helix.  And the preons never stop twisting so the triple helix also never stops twisting.

The preons in the red brane, or ladder upright, all have antired charge and so will repel one another within that brane.  That prevents the electron structure from becoming too compacted.  The structure is held together by attractions between preons of different colour charges.  Each brane has preon links (or open-ended rungs) to both other branes.  Variations in position due to alternate pulling between branes and pushing within branes may also contribute to the Zitterbewegung vibration of the electron: “The zitterbewegung is a local circulatory motion of the electron presumed to be the basis of the electron spin and magnetic moment.” (Hestenes, 1990)

Another mental image of a preon is a rotating pasta twist, with the rotation giving preon field effects.  The electron seems to have a similar thread to the preon but it is a larger-scale rotating triple helix with an electron field-generation mechanism.  Further, if the two ends of the electron helix were perhaps to join together to form a hoop, that closure of the helix might generate or modify field effects.  Despite such a closure, if it occurs, each preon is open-ended in the triple helix which could justify or cause the electron to have spin ½.  If there is a closure, the connections within a brane must be repulsive, and so the cause of a closure would be the attractions between preons of different colours at the two ends, i.e. the closure is effected by the neighbouring branes/preons.  It is difficult to imagine closure when preons have speed c;  but they could not overtake one another.

If the structure is a closed, dynamic triple helix, then it might fit the structure of a hoft fibration.  In this hyperlink picture, the three coloured rings are the three colour charge branes, each with its own 3D space, The 24 strings/preons cannot be seen in the picture but they would hold the branes together by the attractive forces between preons of different colour charges.  The picture is static and does not catch any flavour of the dynamism of the preons or even of the electron.

Photon structure

12.  The photon has 24 preons, eight on each colour brane. The pairings of four of the eight preons on the red brane are shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1    Two red and two antired preons in the photon (of the total of 24 preons in the photon)

  red
brane

+ r
R  —–>———–  }
} One counter-rotating pairing of (RR’)

R’ —–<———–  }

– r

-r
L  —–>———–  }
} One counter-rotating pairing of (LL’)

   L’ —–<———–  }
+r

——————-> universe’s time direction

(The arrows in the preons indicate the preons’ internal time directions.)

Where -r indicates a negative electrical and red colour charge and where R’ and L’ are antimatter preons.  The arrangement pairs one +r preon with one –r preon at all times, i.e. they are counter-rotating pairings.  The two pairs shown are  (LL’) and (RR’).

The other four preons on the red brane can be similarly arranged, again pairing a +r preon with a –r preon at all times.  The total photon would consist of two such Figure 1 groupings for red and the same again for blue and green preons.  All 24 preons would be bound together between branes due to starting out at a point and therefore near enough to each other for the different colour charges to hold the structure together.    The + preon paired to the – preon  would provide linear speed c for the particle.

The L preon in Figure 1 would connect up to, or change into, preon L’ and return from the future within the photon.  This makes a closed string and could possibly be seen as connecting two spin ½ effects to make a united spin 1.

It seems like a deficiency that this model for the photon, and for the neutrino, is not more complex, e.g. it does not appear to close into a particle-scale hoop.  It is a very strange beast, however, and although entanglement has been eschewed it has the notion of a preon (L) setting out in a photon and returning to its starting point via an antimatter preon (L’) ( Figure 1).  If the photon had travelled for millions of years in space, that would make it a very large scale ‘preon hoop’.  The same contents do not necessarily need to be returned, however, as the photon could interact again in the future and transmit that L preon forward in time again and returning an L’ preon with a different content.

Speed c for a particle requires uninterrupted goldstone-like motion along the branes.  There are no links between branes shown for the photon so there is no hint of interference between branes.  The electron, however, used all its dynamism in constant twisting of the branes around one another.

Neutrino structure

13.  The neutrino has 24 preons, eight on each colour brane. The pairings of four of the preons on the red brane are shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2    Two red and two antired preons in the neutrino (of the total of 24 preons in the neutrino)

  red
brane

+r

L’ ——–<——– }
} One counter-rotating pairing of (L’R’)
R’ ——–<——– }
-r

               -r
L  ——–>——– }
} One counter-rotating pairing of (LR)
R  ——–>——– }
+r

  ——————-> universe’s time direction 

The preon pairings in the neutrino are –r with +r, which again gives a pairing of counter-rotating strings and hence particle speed c.  But in the neutrino, matter preons are paired with matter preons (L with R) and antimatter is paired with antimatter (L’ with R’).  Unlike the case for the photon, such preons cannot link up to make a return journey.  L and R preons travel forward forever in our time and L’ and R’ preons travel forever backwards in our time. They cannot return, at least not while part of that neutrino.

As the neutrino strings are open, the neutrino may be assumed to have spin ½, as for the electron.  So the neutrino has the photon’s linear speed but the electron’s spin.

As for the photon, there is no interference between branes (Figure 2).  Again, the model seems to be deficient in giving no clue as to a particle-sized hoop, and no clear particle-sized structure such as the electron triple helix has.

 

The neutrino design has an ambiguity in the colour pairings possible in its construction.  Its colour pairings could be like the photon: i.e. (rr’), (gg’) and  (bb’), but they could also be mixed colours, i.e. (rg’), (rb’), (gr’) etc.  That would work as long as there was no interference between branes and all the dynamism could propel, in goldstone fashion, along the branes.  And that should be satisfactory because the preons in a pair are counter-rotating despite being different colours.  This cannot work for a photon as a photon’s paired preons need to join at their ends (on arrival at an interaction) in order to give spin 1, and that requires the preons in a pair to be the same colour.

Quark structure

14.  An antired antiup quark was previously described as having (bg) at one end and a (gb) at the other end.  If it were to form an open chain, then the antired ends would repel one another so the quark could look like this:

(gb) –  (r’b’)(g’r’)(r’g’)(b’r’)(b’g’)(g’r’)(r’b’)(r’g’)(g’b’)(b’r’) –  (bg)

But if it is a closed loop the quark could look something like this:

(r’b’) (g’r’)  (b’r’) (b’g’)

(gb)                                     (r’g’)

(g’r’)                                       (bg)

(r’b’) (r’g’) (g’b’) (b’r’)

with the antired preon pairs (gb) and (bg) find placement at opposite sides of the loop.

As for the electrons, the quark strings/preons are open. A preon is always paired with a preon of a different colour and so the preons cannot form a loop as it is here assumed that a red preon should start on a red brane, and if it ends on a brane, it cannot be a green one.  A red preon is assumed to  inhabit only a red colour brane.

In swimming manuals, advice for the crawl stroke is given, to push one’s hand against as much different water as possible.  I.e. to push against still water and not to push against the same water which you have already set moving away.  The same may apply to the quarks.  It is the electron which seems to have the structure which spins most consistently one way.  The up quark is most like the positron and should spin less vigorously but maybe is biting on more of the static higgs field, and hence may be heavier.  The down quark is the least consistent in spin direction and maybe therefore the heaviest.  Or there may be different parts of the quark rotating in different directions at the same time.  That might tend to give ‘more still water to bite on’ in the swimming analogy for the quarks than for the electron.

Gluon structure

15.  The eight gluons corresponding to the eight Gell-Mann matrices are:

[r g’ r’ g], [r b’ r’ b], [b g’ b’ g], [r} g’ r’ {g], [r} b’ r’ {b], [b} g’ b’ {g], [r r’ {g g’}] and [r r’  g g’  {b b’} {b b’} ],

where the curly brackets indicate virtual loops and half loops and r’ is, here, an antired antiquark.

In the gluon [r g’ r’ g], all of the four component quarks, or more accurately, all of the 96 component preons/strings are obtained without creations or annihilations from the two particles interacting.

In the [r} g’ r’ {g] gluon, an r r’ pair is created at one interaction (particle 1 with gluon) and a g g’ pair is annihilated at the other interaction (particle 2 with gluon).

In the [r r’ {g g’}] gluon, a g g’ pair is created at one interaction and annihilated at the other interaction, so the g g’ is virtual within the gluon.

In the [r r’  g g’ {b b’} {b b’} ] gluon, two b b’ pairs are created at one interaction and annihilated at the other interaction, so the two b b’ pairs are virtual.

It is assumed that the gluon has bosonic pairings of preons/strings, that is, preon pairings of the form LL’ and RR’.  And as the gluon has speed c and no mass, it is assumed that a red preon is paired with an antired preon;  green with antigreen;  and, blue with antiblue to allow the gluon to have spin 1.

A gluon has equal numbers of each type of colour preon:  8 antired L, 8 antired R’, 8 red L’ and 8 red R preons. Plus 8 antigreen L, 8 antigreen R’, 8 green L’ and 8 green R preons.  Plus 8 antiblue L, 8 antiblue R’, 8 blue L’ and 8 blue R preons.  That is true for seven gluons. The eighth gluon has double those numbers of preons.  This means that all seven gluons have an identical structure, and moreover they have the same structure as the higgs boson (para. 16).  The eighth gluon has the structure of a 2-higgs.

As an example of partition of the gluon/higgs, if the total distribution of preon types and colours of [r g’ r’ g] is formed from table 4, then it will be identical to the distribution of preon types and colours in [r b’ r’ b].  More simply though, any of the first seven gluons can be partitioned into two quark-antiquark pairs e.g. [rr’] and [bb’].  Each of these pairs is equivalent to a Z particle, and the two Zs form a higgs in terms of preon content.  As a Z particle can be partitioned either as an up-antiup quark pair or as a down-antidown pair then the gluon can facilitate either up or down quark interactions.

Higgs structure

16.  Masses of the lighter higgs and other, heavier higgs particles have been calculated through a speculative method associated with but not dependent on this preon model (Table 5).  There is some tentative empirical evidence for particle masses marked with an asterisk in Table 5.   See the following website for more details.

Table 5    Calculated masses of N-higgs particles

N-higgs

Calculated mass (GeV/c2)

2-higgs

   176 *

4-higgs

   244 *

8-higgs

   338 *

16-higgs

470

32-higgs

652

64-higgs

905

128-higgs

1256

256-higgs

   1744 *

512-higgs

   2420 *

1024-higgs

3360*

* There is a tentative match of these calculated masses with empirical data.

The higgs particle is suggested to be a heavier version of the Z particle, which is itself a heavy version of the photon.

A higgs particle has 96 preons, while a 2-higgs has 192, etc.   The pairing of the preons in a higgs is uncertain.  To be an elementary particle boson it should have (LL’) and (RR’) pairings, and that should give it spin 1 if (rr’), (gg’) and (bb’) preons colour pairings are used.  That structure is identical to that of the gluon with a perfect balance of all preon types and colours.

For small numbers of preons in a particle, the boson pair arrangement provides a goldstone boson speed c.  That is because all the movement of the preons is along the branes. The photon has coloured preon pairs of the form (rr’), (gg’) and (bb’) and this could be thought of as isolated colour-matched pairs travelling freely within their branes.  The neutrino also has pairs of preons moving freely within branes, but the electron has preons which twist the branes around one another and this provides inertia and mass.

For the higgs particle to have mass there must be some loss of free movement along the branes.  This is assumed to be because of interference between pairs of (LL’) and (RR’) preons in the same branes when there are many pairs, for example some pairs may try to pull their particle in opposite directions and so provide the particle with inertia and mass.  Yet the gluons have the same structure but without mass.  Maybe this is because the preons are asymmetrically arranged within the gluon whereas the higgs’ preons are arranged symmetrically.  These arrangements are unclear.

One feature of a preon model is that particles are made out of preons.  Preons stay within elementary particle structures until possibly being rearranged into new particles at an interaction.  To make an interaction occur requires an input of energy and that is where energy is required.   It is not the case that particles are made out of pure energy alone, say from the vacuum energy.   Particles can be formed from the vacuum energy, but only by supplying enough energy to cause a vacuum boson’s preons, contained in an n-higgs wave form, to be released by the boson’s decay.  A higgs vacuum energy of about 245 GeV/c2  corresponds in Model #3 to a 4-higgs boson.  For this purpose the Z particle can be thought of as a ½ higgs and a photon as a ¼-higgs.  This unites the forms of the photon, Z and gluons as ¼-higgs, ½ higgs and 1-higgs, but the W boson does not fit this pattern.

A candidate for a dark matter particle

17.  A dark matter particle can be suggested in this model (see Tables 3 and 4) and is described starting with an electron and replacing half of the preons with half of a positron’s preons, as follows:

dark matter particle            =  (LR’) (LR’)(LR’) (LR’)  (LR’) (LR’) –   (L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)(L’R)        {this line shows the preon pairings}

                                                            (r’g’)(r’b’)(g’r’)(g’b’)(b’r’)(b’g’) –   (gr)  (br)  (rg) (bg) (rb) (gb)         {this line shows the colour of the preons}

Note that the photon has the same preon types and frequencies as in the neutrino but the pairings are different. The same preons also occur in the dark matter particle but the pairings are different yet again.

photon                 =  6(LL’) 6(RR’) =  antiphoton

neutrino               =  6(LR) 6(L’R’) =  antineutrino

dark matter          =  6(LR’) 6(L’R) =  antidark matter particle

This dark matter candidate would have zero electric charge and would be neutral in colour charge.  It is possible that there might be heavier members of the dark matter family with structures:    12(LR’) 12(L’R),   18(LR’) 18(L’R),  24(LR’) 24(L’R), etc.

The electron rotates say clockwise and the positron rotates anticlockwise.  Maybe the dark matter particle judders to and fro, alternating clockwise and anticlockwise.  If so, it would have a mass larger than that of the down quark.    There could also be families of dark matter particles containing more massive versions.  A better understanding of the effects of preon pairings is needed here.

Z particle and heavy particles in the electron and neutrino families

18.  The Z particle is a boson and therefore should have preon pairings of the form (LL’) and (RR’).  It is a half-higgs particle, with mass.

A speculation in the model is that the muon has the combined preon contents of an electron plus a Z particle, with all the preon pairings in fermion form: (LR’) and (L’R).  A tauon could have the preon contents of an electron plus two Z particles.

A speculation in the model is that the heavier quark members have the combined preon contents of a quark plus a Z particle, with all the preon pairings in fermion form: (LR’) and (L’R).  The heaviest members could have the preon contents of a quark plus two Z particles.

W structure

19.  W particles cannot, in this model, have only bosonic preon pairings of the form (LL’) and (RR’) and at the same time have an electric charge other than zero.  But the arrangement of preons in a W- particle could be that of the electron plus an antineutrino:  (12, 0, 0, 12) + (6, 6, 6, 6) = (18, 6, 6, 18) where preons keep their pairings from the constituent parts.  But that particle would not be  bosonic.  This is similar to the gluon structures being bosonic with forms such as [r’ g r g’] whereas an r’g particle is neither a gluon nor bosonic.

 

Summary

20.  Preon Model #3 arose from the Rishon model with a removal of the neutral preon as there seemed to be no place for a non-chiral preon which it is presumed could not generate a field effect.   The number of preons in the smallest elementary particles has been increased from six to 24 in order to make an up quark which is unambiguous in structure.  Preons are suggested to be coloured strings attached to, or existing in, their own colour branes only  and travelling in vortices with tangential speed c.  There are two types of preon in the model, one with left-handed chirality and one with right-handed chirality.  Each preon type can, by an observer effect, seem to have an anti-matter version making it appear that there are four types of preons.

All particles have an equal number of matter preons and antimatter preons and so there is no missing preon antimatter in the universe.   QED particles are neutral in colour charge and they possess a balance of colour charges which are important in gluing the preons together within elementary particles but with no overall net colour charge.   The definition of matter and antimatter preons used here does not match the normal definition of matter and antimatter for particles.  Electrons are an equal mix of matter and antimatter preons, and so are positrons.

The most strongly suggested data are the numbers and types of preons in elementary particles (Table 1).  The pairing arrangements (Tables 2 and 3) of the preons are assumed to be vital in determining particle behaviour, indeed the photon, gluon and a hypothesised dark particle all have the same preon contents but it is the different pairings of the preons that determine the different properties of their particles.  In particular, the pairing together of counter-rotating vortices is assumed, as in speed boat propeller design, to give the maximum speed, speed c.  Same-rotating vortices leads to the mass of the electron, as no linear propulsion is available with such an arrangement.

The higgs particle (para. 16) is suggested to be a heavier version of the Z particle, which is itself a heavy version of the photon. There are suggested to be heavier versions of the higgs and, although there seems to be no sign yet of heavier SUSY particle in experimental data, a method of calculating heavy higgs masses shows tentative promise of agreement with experimental data for particles at 176, 244, 338, … , 1744, 2420, 3360, …  GeV/c2.

A dark matter particle (para. 17) has been suggested to occupy a gap in the regular patterns of preons shown in Tables 3 and 4.  The particle is neutral in electrical charge and neutral in colour charge and is as small as the smallest elementary particle, i.e. it has only 24 preons. Its preons are paired like fermions, i.e. (LR’) and (L’R).

Seven gluons (para. 15) are shown to be different partitions of a higgs particle.  These particles have 96 preons.  Any one of these gluons is of the form q1 q1’ +q2 q2’ where q1 and q2 are quarks. This adds to Z + Z, which adds to a higgs particle.  As a Z particle can decompose exactly to either an up-antiup or to a down-antidown quark pair, the higgs can be viewed as a gluon suitable for any quark interaction, no matter whether up or down quarks are involved.  One higgs can dress as seven different gluons.  The eighth gluon, which has the same content as eight quarks, has the exact contents of a 2-higgs particle.

The electron (para. 11) is the most interesting particle in Model #3 as it seems to have a triple helix structure.  The 24 strings/preons are open ended as befitting a fermion.  All the preons in an electron rotate the same way.  That means the twist applied to the three colour branes all tend to twist the electron structure the same way so the structure is a continually twisting triple helix.   The open-ended strings make the electron a spin ½ particle.  It is suggested that the two different spin states for an electron may depend on the order in which the three colour branes are braided in the triple-helix.  There are two ways in which a regularly twisted helix can be made from three strands: rgb… and rbg…

The photon (para. 12 and Figure 1) has 24 preons/strings paired so that a (say) red preon can return in time as an antired preon. This completes a preon loop, i.e. makes a closed string, and makes the photon a spin 1 particle.  This requires counter-rotating vortices which generate speed c for the photon.  The neutrino (para. 13 and Figure 2) has 24 strings paired so that a (say) red preon and an antired preon are coupled together.  But the red preon cannot form a closed loop with the antired preon in this case as both preons are either made of matter or of antimatter.  So the neutrino cannot form a closed loop of preons and hence is a spin ½ fermion but yet attains particle speed c because of its counter-rotating vortices.

The quarks (para. 14) have 24 preons and are asymmetrical mixtures of the electron and positron.  The quarks probably form closed triple-helices as probably does the electron.  Reasons are speculated as to why the down quark is heavier than the up, and why the up is heavier than the electron.  In para. 18, preon contents for the heavier members of the electron and quark families are suggested but they are very speculative.

Manchester

England

AJF/19May2013/v2

 

 

References

ben6993, Preon model #3 https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!topic/sci.physics.foundations/t4v45NeO6-k

(Date sequenced notes showing development of ideas in model #3, but including false leads.)

ben6993, Masses of N-Higgs-type particles http://wp.me/p18gTT-8

 

Boatfix Inc,   Propellers   http://www.boatfix.com/how/props.html

Christian, J., Disproof of Bell’s Theorem (one-page paper) http://arxiv.org/pdf/1103.1879v1.pdf

Harari, H. (1979). “A Schematic Model of Quarks and Leptons“. Physics Letters B 86 (1): 83–86, and Shupe, M. A. (1979). “A Composite Model of Leptons and Quarks“. Physics Letters B 86 (1): 87–92.

and

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harari-Schupe_preon_model

Hestenes, D.,  The Zitterbewegung Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, Found. Physics., Vol. 20, No. 10, (1990) 1213- 1232

and

http://ckw.phys.ncku.edu.tw/public/pub/Notes/Mathematics/Geometry/Hestenes/GAinQM/ZBW_I_QM.pdf

Ohanian, H.C., What is Spin? Am. J. Phys. 54 (6), 500-505 (June 1986)

and http://www.scribd.com/doc/74136728/Spin-Ohanian

This entry was posted in physics. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s