Physical Model vs. Standard Model

Physical Model of Particles and Forces versus Standard Model of Particles and Forces


To properly understand particles and forces, we must theoretically perceive and enter their fundamental structures--in a world where particles may have dimensions on the order of the Planck length, the smallest possible measurable length. Actually seeing these fundamental structures is impossible, so we need to model that world to visualize it. Science can model the unknown by using either analog or digital methods. For example: If the smallest possible particle is a quantum string, as String Theory postulates, then to solve a problem the analog way, a scientist must visualize strings from the macro-world we live in to model strings in the subatomic world. The product of this modeling is physical, and is called the Physical Model of Particle and Forces.

The digital method, however, uses varying quantities of the solved problem as numerical values that are further changed by modeling functions to computer simulations. In our case, digital modelers apply the wave-function data of particles and forces to a mathematical matrix-that is, a physical field-and add to it other mathematical descriptions, thus modeling them using other mathematical tools. Hence, digital modeling is more mathematical than the physical, although it is termed "quantum physics." Its proponents call the product of digital modeling the Standard Model.

From a physical viewpoint, we can say that the basic tool used to create the Standard Model of Particles and Forces is String Theory. However, mathematicians quickly omitted the fundamental object of nature that led to the modeling in the first place: the elemental string itself! Having ignored the first step, they have started from the second - elasticity. Abandoning the real objects allows them to project any particle if only follows initial conditions, as are wave functions; neither forces need objects to exist, they may be just products math functions and someone's prejudice.

In this book, I attempt to restore the first step of physical modeling, in an effort to maintain the concept of a string as a real object at the smallest miclevel. The difference between the two theories can best be understood by using the example of a guitar. A guitar string is tuned by stretching the string under tension. Different musical notes are created by the motion of the string as it is plucked. These musical notes are excitation modes of that string under tension. The digital model of particles and forces is developed only from the "musical notes" of elementary strings, and that is why they get many variations. You see, the fundamental particles of nature don't really exist for the proponents of the Standard Model: they are simply the wave functions in various configurations derived from these "sounds." Thus, they see our material world as a human belief, since everything visible arises from the invisible wave-function energies.

My version of String Theory postulates an actual, physical string, something like the stretched string across a guitar, as the subatomic object on which physics is based. In other words, I have applied the physics of strings in the macro-world to sub-microscopic-level objects the size of fundamental strings. The environment in which strings interact I will call the String World. Since physicists have estimated the smallest possible length of measurement as roughly 1.6 x 10-35 meters, the Planck length, then String Theory probably works with particles of this size. Because the elementary particles of the known world are roughly 10-15 m in size, then the elementary particles of the String World should be 1020 times smaller.

The Elementary String

The primary feature defining our world is life. The nature of life reflects in the internal dynamics by which objects adjust themselves to inner and outer needs--for example, by changing shape in space without any geographic limits. We can observe similar dynamics in strings, although they are non-living matter. A string can be lengthened, shortened, or bent, creating one- or two-dimensional objects in space. By adding dynamics to these strings, we can produce one- or two-dimensional vibrations. When energy of rotation is added, the string rotates around its axis of rotation and, if bent, creates dynamic three-dimensional objects. From this, we can conclude that we can simulate the way fundamental particles of the universe behave by using strings in our macro-world. This is one reason why we call the elementary particle of the universe a "string."

The existence of strings as the smallest particles of matter has been physically confirmed. We can model a photon, for example, as a vibrating string propagating through space. Thanks to the interactions of photons with material objects, we can see those material objects. This is how we register the material world, which is why we also call it the visible world. Material things, of course, also produce strings. Free neutrons produce strings during their decay into protons, electrons, and neutrinos. The primary items of the collisions of protons in CERN's collider are moving strings from which photons are registered. Objects are made up of protons, neutrons, and electrons arranged into atoms, which when excited produce photons--moving strings--that we can use to identify chemical elements with a high degree of accuracy. And so on. In nature, we can observe strings that first lengthen and then shorten in one dimension, something like macro-world springs or, even better, elastic strings. Let's call such strings longitudinal strings, and take a closer look at their characteristics.

Go to the next chapter "Longitudinal Strings"

or to the book to read about Relativity vs. Reality.

Go to Home Page