Authors: Peter Horst Rehm
The first theories of atomic nuclear cohesion entailed electric forces binding together protons with a few electrons in the nucleus. The 1932 discovery of neutrons destroyed that line of thinking. The evidence suggested a new fundamental force of nature characterized by operation on both protons and electrically-neutral neutrons, with a very short range, and overpowering strength. Presented herein are novel and non-obvious structures that show these characteristics could nevertheless be manifestations of the electrical force. Protons and neutrons are now known to each securely contain fractional charges of both signs. If two oppositely-charged fractional charges in neighboring nucleons can get within 5% of a nucleon radius, Coulomb's law predicts they will form an electrical bond strong enough to explain nuclear cohesion. Ironically, such electrical bonds would be characterized by the very phenomena that were thought to rule out the electrical force: participation of neutrons, nucleon-contact distances, and more powerful than overall proton repulsion. Such bonding also predicts saturation at three bonds per nucleon, particularly stable 4-nucleon rings, limited 3D structures of nucleons, and more. If fractional charges had been known in 1932, scientists would have adapted their theories of an electrically-bound nucleus before assuming that they had discovered a new fundamental force of nature.
Comments: 23 Pages.
Download: PDF
[v1] 2021-02-19 22:32:21
Unique-IP document downloads: 347 times
Vixra.org is a pre-print repository rather than a journal. Articles hosted may not yet have been verified by peer-review and should be treated as preliminary. In particular, anything that appears to include financial or legal advice or proposed medical treatments should be treated with due caution. Vixra.org will not be responsible for any consequences of actions that result from any form of use of any documents on this website.
Add your own feedback and questions here:
You are equally welcome to be positive or negative about any paper but please be polite. If you are being critical you must mention at least one specific error, otherwise your comment will be deleted as unhelpful.