Beyond Bohr: Unpicturing Atoms

Dive into the world of atomic models and explore key experiments that deepen our understanding of atoms at the quantum level. This video is part of Perimeter Institute's free educational resource Beyond Bohr: A Quantum Approach to the Atom.
Download the teacher's guide, modifiable worksheets, and supporting materials at: resources.perimeterinstitute....
Perimeter's educational outreach programs and resources like these are made possible in part thanks to our donors. Be part of the equation: perimeterinstitute.ca/donate​

[@Slackwise]

Wow, this video was so short, but so fantastically informative with great visuals!

[@Psnym]

Look out - a new powerhouse in science communications is awakening at Perimeter!

[@BlueGiant69202]

You may be right Pseudo Nym but in light of Physics as Modeling according to David Hestenes, this presentation seems more like a multi-decades-old expression of naive realism rather than scientific realism. In some ways, this video is around twenty years out of date as Multivector Calculus has made possible different physical interpretations of classical and quantum mechanical equations and the Stern-Gerlach experiment. It's a good, helpful video for people doing physics but it needs to be updated and improved for Modeling Instruction.

[@genghisgalahad8465]

I'm glad and encouraged to have come across this insightful video without having to thumbnail clickbait "idea of atoms are WRONG!"

[@Epoch11]

I wish you people put out more stuff because I would enjoy watching a lecture like this which was an hour long. I know you're busy doing other stuff, but spare a thought for us plebs.

[@preposterouswalrus1886]

On the contrary, I appreciate a short video!

[@primemagi]

Hello Tony, I wish you success with your hypothesis. Sadly I do not have any. I have access to information new to mankind. As and when appropriate, I am allowed releasing them. To be able to convey it correctly I must understand it myself. When I was young, I thought it was going to be easy, but when I began, I found man’s science is not true. Once again our effort has become new religion full of dogmas just like the past. The only difference is they call it LAMBDA-CDM and sell it as science. It is very difficult to get new thing across when it has become a belief. Logic has only superficial role. Now that mankind once again has World Wide Web, our work has come to end. As the last prime Magi, I have access to the remaining unknown in physic. Difficulty was I did not have evidence to understand them fully. This was resolved when my source provided the means to see Atom; it’s function and structure. How matter evolved producing every thing. So when I say I have seen, I mean I have physically seen them. Photon is disk shape. It can only be seen perpendicular to source of emission or reflection. Not from side or behind. For this reason gravity has little effect on it from side and max effect from front and back in direction of travel. Its internal structure has full range of frequencies, which our eyes interpret some as colour in everyday life. Kind regard

[@guitargil]

The kids in the back of the class will be re-watching this a few times for sure. Informative!

[@bidiudy]

Very informative video to tell the essential behaviour of the quantum nature of the electron and its ‘spin’. Please create similar videos on how other parts of the standard model emerge. Pictures and metaphors can not fully explain the full blown QED and QCD. However, simplified yet essential understanding is important as a gateway to better understand quantum computing and modern electronics. Thanks…. I am grateful to you and your team at PI.

[@SaemPhysics]

We need that type of clear concepts to our students

[@AntoineVideoLibrary]

I'm looking forward to more of these videos. Thank you very much.

[@TheScentofmusic]

Excellent explanation of visualized atoms.

[@user-wu8yq1rb9t]

*Short and Sweet* *Great* *It was full course of Quantum Mechanics!* Please more like this. Thank you so much

[@TheHamoodz]

Yes please! More PI videos like this!!!

[@jayantadhar7774]

Beautifully explained

[@williambunting803]

A lot to think about there. I like to visualise Protons as having an energy thread loop emanating from and returning to the Nucleus and with an energy flow direction. This loop is oscillating wildly according to the constraints around it to form the probability image of a shape that anchors at the Proton. A full sphere for one proton in an atom, then a range of other shapes as more protons are added. This is the positive charge of the Proton. As more Protons are added to an atom these loops become distorted to form the shell arrangement that chemistry uses. Electrons attach to these loops according to their energy level. The exercise is to see if there is a set of mechanisms that would be a Universe without there being a force of attraction, only either particles being drawn along the flow direction of an energy loop or matter self propelling by the energy reaction of the quarks in the nucleus following an energy intensity gradient of a universal field (the field I prefer to think of as the Higgs Field which to make this work must be a scalar field where the local energy level is determined by the amount and proximity of matter)

[@TheLivirus]

Very informative video, well rooted in observation!

[@steveba50]

Excellent explanation thank you

[@Neo-ui8we]

Dope! Just amazing.

[@evangelosspyromilios5994]

Excellent and informative, Thank you !! But for me the question remains.. What is the best possible way to imagine atoms ? Perhaps with the atomic orbitals indicating the probability to 'find' an electron ?

[@kashu7691]

i would think so

[@lolygagger5991]

Cool 👍

[@Quantum_Tech42]

😍so cool

[@SaemPhysics]

Great PI

[@russchadwell]

"Spin": rotational angular momentum without all that bothersome turning.

[@tonymarshharveytron1970]

Hello, it is interesting to hear you agreeing that the standard model's description of the atom is flawed. I have been working on an hypothesis for a radical alternative to the standard model of the atom, as I believe that the standard model of the atom is flawed at the fundamental level, for the following reasons, amongst others. These are just some of the reasons why I feel that the standard flawed and is what led me to propose and alternative model. a). How is it possible for a single electron as in the case of the hydrogen atom, to form an ' Electron Cloud ', that fills the whole area between the nucleus and the outer boundary of the atom, at every moment in time, when this area is millions of times that of the electron? b). If the electron does act as described in the standard model, by whizzing around the nucleus, changing trajectory many thousands of times a second, where does it get its energy from to initiate and maintain its momentum? c). Following on from b). This momentum and changing of trajectory would require energy to be expended, and thus dissipating heat. Therefore, every atom and therefore all matter would be emitting heat, which plainly it is not? This proves that the electron, as described in the standard model, cannot be moving, but must be at rest, unless exited by an external influence, therefore the standard model is wrong. d). How is it possible for the electron to have the same charge holding capacity as the proton, which is around 2,000 times its size. It would be like a tiny watch battery having the same charge holding capacity as a very large tractor battery? e). In the standard model the proton and the neutron are each made up of three quarks, these in turn are able to transmute from one to the other, with the ejection of a neutino or antineutrino, and an electron. This would indicate there are electrons contained in the nucleus, which contradicts the statement in the standard model, that the electron cann't combine with the nucleus. This make a nonsense of the assertion that the electron has an equal but opposite charge to the proton. This proves that the standard model is fundamentally flawed, since the electron in the space outside the nucleus has a charge value of one, negative, and the proton is one positive, the presence of these electrons in the nucleus should make it negative. F}. The accepted view, according to the standard mode, is that space is a vacuum. If this is the case, how is it possible for light and all electromagnetic radiation or shock waves, refered to as gravitation waves to travel through space? Since it is accepted that all electromagnetic radiation and gravitational waves are ' Waves ', there has to be a medium in which a wave can propagate and travel, therefore, space must contain a cloud of matter particles, such as I describe in my hypothesis, to facilitate this propagation. In explanation for the above, the cornerstone of my hypothesis is that there exist two, as yet undiscovered incredibly small particles, that either in combination or seperately make up everything in the universe. One is a negarively charged monopole particle called a ' Harveytron ', which in a cloud fills every available space between the nucleus and the boundary of the atom, and every available empty space throughout the whole universe. It is also the particle, that in a cluster, makes up what is the electron in the standard model. This particle in the ' Harveytron Cloud ', makes up the ' Daek Matter '. It will be seen that as these particles are negatively charged monopoles, they will be trying to repel each other in every dirtion. This produces a force of repulsion throughout the universe, and is what is ' Dark Energy ', and is one of the forces of gravity, which I believe is a force of both attraction and repulsion. It is the force that holds all of the planets apart. The second is a corresponding positively charged monopole particle, called a ' Dannytron ', which in combination with the ' Harveytron ', makes up all of the nuclei, and there fore all of the nuclear matter in the universe. This is the other force of gravity, producing the force of attraction between nuclei. I am happy to explain more if you are interested. I believe that the construction of the nucleus, is different from that of the standard model. I also believe that all of the particles making up the table of the standard model, are man made, or rather just pieces of atomic matter broken off of the atom following collider collisions, and are all composites of the two particles I describe. I am happy to explain more if you are interested. Kind regards, Tony Marsh.

[@mudkip_btw]

I can't answer all of your questions, but I believe I can at least clarify some issues you mention. 1. QED shows that it is not correct to think of the electron as a particle with a location, rather it is an excitation in the electron field, which "fills" all space. 2. Electrons in atoms in the ground state are in fact static, just not in the classical sense pertaining to objects in motion. Rather, the probability distribution associated with the ground state is the thing which is stationary. 3. You talk about charge containing capacity and size, and I wonder why these things are necessarily related. As you already mention, protons are made of quarks bound by the strong force, so protons are "empty" in the same sense as atoms are. 4. People always talk about the vacuum as if it were empty, but this is not true in QFT. Space is filled with the fields of the standard model particles. These fields have ground states too, and these ground states are non-zero. This idea combined with thermodynamics turns into the concept of vacuum fluctuations. I hope that helps in some way or another.

[@tonymarshharveytron1970]

@@mudkip_btw Thank you for your interesting reply. It would appear that you are confirming what I am proposing in my hypothesis. As you would have realized, the questions that I proposed were rhetorical, insomuch as logically they do not make sense. In the standardmodel, there are so many things that are stated as fact, yet no explanation is given of how they interact or what they consist of. As you sat in 1. if the idear of the electron is spread out filling space, it can't be a fundamental solid particle, so why does the standard model portray it as such. In 2. If as you say, in the standard model it is now enterpreted that the electron in its ground state is stationary ( as I state ), what stops it combining with the nucleus, without some form of repulsive force, as I maintain. All the mathematical equations composed to prove that due to angular momentum stops the electron from combining with the nucleus, are wrong. With regard to 3. to store charge, you have to have a medium in which to store it. If you consider a capicitor, the quantity of charge you can stor in it is related size of the plate that the charge is being stored on. I relate the same concept to the atom, and it just seams ilogical to have the electron holding the the same quantity of charge as th proton, which is around 2,000 time larger in mass. In 4. you mention ' Vacuum function '. This is the first time I have heard of this term. You say that the vacuum of space is not empty, and I agree with 100%, however all references to a vacuum, is that it is empty, and the greatest vacuum is in space. In QFT, you say that space is filled with fields of the particles of the standard model. What do these fields consist of? How does each of these fields interact with each other? What relationship do they have with gravity? You metion ' Glueons ', how do they bind the nucleus together, nobody realy knows. You must admit, it is a bit of a mess, that is why I disagree with the standard model, and I have composed an hypothesis challenging it. For your interest, I will send a very brief overview of my hypothesis for your perusal. I would be interested in any objective criticisum you may have. I hypothesize that everything in the universe is composed of just two incredibly small particles that I have proposed. One is a negatively charged monopole particle called a ' Harveytron ', which fills every available empty space between the nucleus and the boundary of the atom, and every available empty space throughout the universe, in a cloud called the ' Harveytron Cloud '. These particles make up the ' Dark Matter ', and the negative force of repulsion that is produced by them trying to repel each other in every direction, is the ' Dark Energy '. This is the force that keeps all of the planets suspended, and stops them from being drawn to each other, and is what is causing the expansion of the universe ( if it is ). The second, is a corresponding positively charged monopole particle, called a ' Dannytron ', which, in combination with the ' Harveytrons ', make up all of the nuclei and therefore all of the nuclear matter in the universe. They are what makes up the other force of gravitational attraction between the nuclear matter of the universe. Starting with the atom, I believe that all of the particles making up the table of particles in the standard model, are man-made, and just pieces of nuclear detritus following collider collisions. I believe that the nucleus is composed of successive layers of the two positive and negatively charged monopole ' Harveytrons ' and ' Dannytrons ', that I describe, like a gobstopper sweet. The different elements being determined by the number of the positively charged ' Dannytrons ' contained in the nucleus. Beyond the last layer of positively charged particles there exists just the negatively charged ' Harveytrons ', which fill every available empty space between the nucleus and the outer boundary of the atom. This boundary is determined where the point of equilibrium is reached between the attractive force of the positively charged particles contained in the nucleus to the negatively charged particles in the ' Harveytron cloud ', and the repulsive force of the ' Harveytron cloud ' and the negative charge of the ' Harveytrons ' contained in the nucleus meets. Beyond this boundary, there exists only the negatively charged ' Harveytron ' monopole particles throughout every available empty space in the universe, creating a negative force of repulsion throughout the universe, and is one of the two components of gravity. I would contend that these monopoles, do not give up their charge, and the forces of each, extend through each particle, which in the case of the positive extends to the boundary of the atom and the negative extends to the centre of the nucleus. Electron. I contend that the electron is not an elementary solid particle, but a cluster of the negatively charged ' Harveytron ' particles that I propose. These clusters form due to the mass of the ' Harveytron Cloud ' trying to reach the nucleus, and as any force is applied to the atom, a pulse of energy is ejected from one atom to the next as happens with the photon. The quantity of energy in these pulses is always the same and is a constant. The charge held by these clusters, is not equal to the positive charge of the nucleus, but just a proportion of it. the amount of charge equal but opposite that of the nucleus, is distributed throughout the ' Harveytrons ' contained in the area between the nucleus and the boundary of the atom. Gravity. It will be noticed that there exists a massive exces of the negatively charged ' Harveytron ' monopole particles. These, although incredibly small ( too small to detect with the equipment we have }. do have mass, and as such account for all of the missing mass of the universe, and is the proposed dark matter. The force of repulsion they produce keeps all atomic nuclear matter such as the planets, suspended in space keeping them apart unless they get too close to each other, when they will merge. This is the proposed ' Dark Energy '. Because all nuclear matter is encased in these particles, it is forced against large mass of matter, as we are to the earth. This is the repulsive force of gravity, pushing matter together, It will be realized that this repulsive force is also pushing out from the large mass, as all of the negative particle are trying to repel each other in every direction. However, because the nuclear matter contains the compact mass containing all of the positively charged ' Dannytron ' monopole particles, in all of the nuclei. these create the attractive force of gravity, which is stronger that the repulsive force, and acts to try to attract nuclear matter to nuclear matter. Our atmosphere defines where the two forces of gravity reach equilibrium, beyond which, there is the constant repulsive force of the ' Harveytron Cloud ' (dark energy ). This force is a constant, and the total force of gravity is determined by the number of nuclei contained in a given mass of matter. The larger the nuclear mass, the stronger the gravity. The existence of the ' Harveytron Cloud ', provides a medium in which electromagnetic radiation, or any shock wave can travel through space. It is obvious that this is just an overview and all points can be extrapolated a great deeal, but I hope it gives an insight and food for thought. I would be interested what your thought are. Kind regards, Tony Marsh.

[@jedgould5531]

Her eyes are so compelling it’s distracting when she blinks them a lot. 😳😍

[@urielventris4917]

A comment to boost your algorithm.

[@primemagi]

To picture one needs to know the structure. The problem with your picture is multi assumption rather than facts. Here you heat gas to generate light (a train of photon). Mankind dose not know structure of photon or how and where it is generated. Seeing light through diffraction grating show the light has been modified by interaction, but without knowing by what? You do not know structure of atom and it’s function. How it’s function changes by heat, magnetic and gravity. So from a group of assumption you create more assumptions. You have indirect data to give you full picture of atom, but you do not have any one with intelligence to correctly interpret them. Your experiment is like a stamped in nightclub. Bodies are your diffraction line. Putting pressure on stamped will alter the result, but dose not tell you how. That is why over 90% of standard model is wrong and you have been too stupid to ask me past 47 years. May long continue.

[@tonymarshharveytron1970]

Hello, I read your reply with interest, an it is good to see people question the status quo. I have a suggestion ( an hypothesis ) that is based on logic , not mathematics, or other peoples views, which I may be of interest to you as follows. I have been working on an hypothesis for a radical alternative to the standard model of the atom, as I believe that the standard model of the atom is flawed at the fundamental level, for the following reasons, amongst others. These are just some of the reasons why I feel that the standard flawed and is what led me to propose and alternative model. a). How is it possible for a single electron as in the case of the hydrogen atom, to form an ' Electron Cloud ', that fills the whole area between the nucleus and the outer boundary of the atom, at every moment in time, when this area is millions of times that of the electron? b). If the electron does act as described in the standard model, by whizzing around the nucleus, changing trajectory many thousands of times a second, where does it get its energy from to initiate and maintain its momentum? c). Following on from b). This momentum and changing of trajectory would require energy to be expended, and thus dissipating heat. Therefore, every atom and therefore all matter would be emitting heat, which plainly it is not? This proves that the electron, as described in the standard model, cannot be moving, but must be at rest, unless exited by an external influence, therefore the standard model is wrong. d). How is it possible for the electron to have the same charge holding capacity as the proton, which is around 2,000 times its size. It would be like a tiny watch battery having the same charge holding capacity as a very large tractor battery? e). In the standard model the proton and the neutron are each made up of three quarks, these in turn are able to transmute from one to the other, with the ejection of a neutino or antineutrino, and an electron. This would indicate there are electrons contained in the nucleus, which contradicts the statement in the standard model, that the electron cann't combine with the nucleus. This make a nonsense of the assertion that the electron has an equal but opposite charge to the proton. This proves that the standard model is fundamentally flawed, since the electron in the space outside the nucleus has a charge value of one, negative, and the proton is one positive, the presence of these electrons in the nucleus should make it negative. F}. The accepted view, according to the standard mode, is that space is a vacuum. If this is the case, how is it possible for light and all electromagnetic radiation or shock waves, refered to as gravitation waves to travel through space? Since it is accepted that all electromagnetic radiation and gravitational waves are ' Waves ', there has to be a medium in which a wave can propagate and travel, therefore, space must contain a cloud of matter particles, such as I describe in my hypothesis, to facilitate this propagation. In explanation for the above, the cornerstone of my hypothesis is that there exist two, as yet undiscovered incredibly small particles, that either in combination or seperately make up everything in the universe. One is a negarively charged monopole particle called a ' Harveytron ', which in a cloud fills every available space between the nucleus and the boundary of the atom, and every available empty space throughout the whole universe. It is also the particle, that in a cluster, makes up what is the electron in the standard model. This particle in the ' Harveytron Cloud ', makes up the ' Daek Matter '. It will be seen that as these particles are negatively charged monopoles, they will be trying to repel each other in every dirtion. This produces a force of repulsion throughout the universe, and is what is ' Dark Energy ', and is one of the forces of gravity, which I believe is a force of both attraction and repulsion. It is the force that holds all of the planets apart. The second is a corresponding positively charged monopole particle, called a ' Dannytron ', which in combination with the ' Harveytron ', makes up all of the nuclei, and there fore all of the nuclear matter in the universe. This is the other force of gravity, producing the force of attraction between nuclei. I am happy to explain more if you are interested. I believe that the construction of the nucleus, is different from that of the standard model. I also believe that all of the particles making up the table of the standard model, are man made, or rather just pieces of atomic matter broken off of the atom following collider collisions, and are all composites of the two particles I describe. I am happy to explain more if you are interested. Kind regards, Tony Marsh.

[@primemagi]

@@tonymarshharveytron1970 Tony Marsh. Standard model is bullshit. It is advisable not to feast on it. Has some good bits, but only suitable for dung beetle. Electron cloud is understandable if the image is taken by photon reflected by orbiting electron. Like time laps of A butterfly orbiting a candle. It will help your model to know what part is correct and the part, which are not. Atom has a nuclei, electron and photon. They interact with gravity. They all have complex structures. Electron is incomplete nuclei when they were being created. They can be easily moved, as they are not fixed like nuclei. There is no neutron in atom. Neutron is fragment of nuclei when they are broken down. Vacuum does not exist in physical universe. Space is variation density of matter. Electromagnetic radiation is wrong. Maxwell combined magnetic field with electric field. Ignoring electric field require a conductor. Mankind use it because they do not know photon, how or where it is created or how it travel. Gravitational wave is fiction just like Higges field. There is no monopole. Dark matter does not exist. Past 11 years I have offered top universities and scientist £10,000 to prove me wrong. Like dark energy is due to ignorance. Western leaders know over 90% is wrong they do not care because there are billions being stolen by scams from public money under guise of science search for non existing matters. that is why I stopped contacting them and my science information being given to eastern nation by our people.

[@tonymarshharveytron1970]

@@primemagi Hello Ferydoon, thank you for your interesting reply. You obviously feel the same as I do regarding the standard model ( S M }, which I believe is far too complecated to be a workable model. I can agree with you on many points of your reply, but perhaps, for different reasons, which I will explain. May I ask, are you a physicist working in the field? I am not a physicist, but I am a 72 year old inventor, with patents granted in mechanical engineering and botany. I am also a ' Seer ', and can often see past problems that others cant. I have a background in both mechanical and electrical engineering, and spent 11 years working in the technical side of ' British Telecom ', as a technical testing engineer. I have looked into the problems existing in quantum mechanics and cosmology, and have seen a logical way to solve them. I have not used any mathematics, because I believe that any model should be able to be explained logically first, and also, because mine is a completely new approach, there are as yet no definitive quantitative measurements to base any equations on. Mine is an hypothesis, not a theory, that has undergone any experimental scrutiny, but is based on logic. Like yourself, I believe that the table of particle making up the SM, is rubbish, and they are in fact, just broken off pieces of atomic matter, and are all man-made. I agree that ' Gravitational waves ', are in fact shock waves and nothing to do with gravity, other than travelling through a gravitational medium. With regard to the ' Higgs ' field, I do not believe in quantum field theory, I believe there is only one medium that fills space, and that is the ' Harveytron cloud ', that I mentioned and will explain in more detail. I also agree that billions of pounds are being wasted looking for particle that do not exist. I also agree with you about the neutron. I honestly can't see any logical reason for it. I believe it was only invented to account for the missing weight and mass of the nucleus. However, I take a different view with regard to the other things you mention. Not knowing your ideas of how the atom is constructed and the interaction that produce gravity ect, I would be interested in comparing alternative models of the SM. A very brief overview of my hypothesis is as follows. As stated in my previous reply, the cornerstone of my hypothesis is that there exist two, as yet undiscovered incredibly small particles, that either in combination or seperately make up everything in the universe. One is a negarively charged monopole particle called a ' Harveytron ', which in a cloud fills every available space between the nucleus and the boundary of the atom, and every available empty space throughout the whole universe. It is also the particle, that in a cluster, makes up what is the electron in the standard model. This particle in the ' Harveytron Cloud ', makes up the ' Dark Matter '. It will be seen that as these particles are negatively charged monopoles, they will be trying to repel each other in every dirction. This produces a force of repulsion throughout the universe, and is what is ' Dark Energy ', and is one of the forces of gravity, which I believe is a force of both attraction and repulsion. It is the force that holds all of the planets apart, and could explain the expansion of the universe. The second is a corresponding positively charged monopole particle, called a ' Dannytron ', which in combination with the ' Harveytron ', makes up all of the nuclei, and therefore all of the nuclear matter in the universe. This is the other force of gravity, producing the force of attraction between nuclei, and therefore atomic matter. Starting with the atom, I hypothesize that the nucleus is composed of the two monopole particles that I propose. It could be constructed in two ways, either a complete mixture of these particles, or my first choice alternate positive and negatively charged shell, like a ' Gobstopper ' sweet, starting with a positive particle in the middle. The different elements being defined by the number of positively charged particles contained in the nucleus. Beyond the nucleus, there are only the negatively charged particles trying to repel each other in every direction. The boundary of the atom is defined at the point where equilibrium is reached between attractive force of the positive particles in the nucleus, and the repulsion of the negatively charged particles. These monopole particles do not give up their forces of attraction and repulsion when in close contact with their opposites, and maintain this force to the boundary of the atom. Because there are these forces pulling and pushing the nucleus together, at the boundary it is likely that the negatively charged particles will bunch up, and these clusters are what would be defined as the electron in the SM. The photon is produced from these clusters when the threshold preasure of charge is reached in this boundary area, when a pulse of energy is released to the next atom. This works like an SCR in an electrical circuit. any external force on the atom, trigers this release. The interaction of forces in the atom is quantum gravity, and the interaction between the positive force contained in all of the atomic nuclei in the universe, and the negatively charged ' Harveytron cloud ', is gravity. The particles making up the ' Harveytron Cloud ', is ' Dark Matter ', and provides a medium in which it possible for shock waves, and electromagnetic radiation to trave through space. It is only called dark matter, because it can't be seen. The same can be said for ' Dark Energy '. We know that there is a foce that is causing the universe to expand, but it can't be explained. The force of repulsion created by my proposed negatively charged ' Harveytron Clound ', repelling in every direction fits the bill Although I can't prove my hypothesis right, I would challenge anyone to be able to prove it impossibaly wrong. At any rate, it is far more logical than the standard model, with ever increasing numbers of particles. This is obviously a very brief description of the various parts of my hypothesis, but I will stop here, and get your thoughts on what I have said so far. Kind regards, Tony Marsh.

[@primemagi]

@@tonymarshharveytron1970 You say you use logic and know standard model is wrong. This is contradiction. If it is wrong you should not use it at all and make your own model. Age has nothing to do with logic. I was 5 and grandfather made me prove e=mc2 is wrong. I am 80 years and know over 90% of SM is wrong. It is easy to know something is wrong, but it is better to have something correct to replace it. I can only tell you what is wrong but I cannot tell you what is to replace it. My information has global impact on science and industry, especially space. I was asked to come to west to complete my grandfather unfinished work with Max plank and others. I am happy to tell you the information I have released, but cannot share the rest unless it is official and at UN science meeting. My treatment in UK and crap called standard model is not worthy of my science information. It will be purl before swine. I only comment for people like you who like to reflect on what they have been fed. Your model should start from basic building block, atom. Currently nuclei, electron, photon is correct, but their structures are wrong. If you want my help use logic and tell me what is the shape of photon? Remember light is a train of photon.

[@primemagi]

@@tonymarshharveytron1970 There is no monopole in nature, only in theory/fiction. I have released electron information. Electron physical body is like tennis ball. Similarly its Surface is covered with fine filaments (flux). It is not anchored, so free to move and rotate in any direction like floating seeds in wind. There is no dark energy. It is ignorant scientists misinterpretations of photon interactions with gravity in space. Your nuclei structure is not logical. You said layers with charge. They will neutralise each other. As you have no access to centre layer, you cannot utilise potential difference between enter and outer layer. This means there will be only one charge on the outer creating only repulsion. SCR need a potential difference on anode and cathode for the gate to trigger conduction. Gravity as we told Newton is NAZ, he translated it as attraction. We did not tell him how it is generated, because he was a mean man and Britain would have misused it. As I mentioned before there is no dark matter or energy.