 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
The SM contends that atoms are conglomerations of protons and neutrons surrounded by an electron "cloud" that gives each particular atom its behavioral properties. Not only is each atom not considered a fixed size entity, but when they combine to create a molecule such as water, an overlap of the atom boundaries occur, or alternatively, they have a sort of space that appears between the components that holds the atoms apart. A physical model based on treating atoms as solid spheres is completely out of the question. It just so happens that I can prove that the liquid behavior of water, as well as the solid behavior of ice are without a doubt created in exactly that way, as atoms of ball-bearing-like construction. There is a lot of information about all of the phases of H2O, so having such information helps in making the definition possible. Here are the only properties of H2O that are needed to accomplish the feat of defining its constructions. Bond Angle (liquid): 104.45° The first step in the physical description of a water molecule is to define an overall size. As a liquid at 4°C, it would occupy a minimum volume equal to its mass (2.991E-26 kg) divided by its density (1000 kg/m3), which equals 2.991E-29 m3. This is equivalent to a molecule having an effective radius of 1.552E-10 m. It isn’t necessary for the actual volume of the molecule to exactly equal the calculated volume, but it is necessary that it present a shape that fits within an average boundary of that size while attaching to any neighboring molecules. One key element that narrows down construction possibilities is the bond angle. The SM does not require any physical reason for bond angles to be any particular value, but they still manage to explain it with some intricate QM mathematics. For our physical ball bearing-style model it must be a reason based on geometry. To define a physical construction we shall use the bond angle of 104.45° between the two hydrogen atom centers, with the center of the oxygen atom at the focal point of the angle. Figure 1 is how a water molecule is depicted in Wikipedia.
Figure 1 Intersecting spheres like those shown in Figure 1 do not work in a ball bearing type of model, such as that of ultrawave theory. Instead, what we would see is a set of spheres that are linked edge to edge. That fact also makes the center distances different than the 0.9584E-10m shown. Figure 2 shows the basic idea of the formation of a water molecule if the hydrogen atoms are attached to the oxygen atoms using the 104.45° bond angle. Since mass roughly equals size in a ball bearing style model, the presence of electrons between the components can essentially be ignored, as their small size makes them invisible on this scale.
Figure 2 In Figure 2 the hydrogen atom size is calculated as if another oxygen atom were directly adjacent to the existing oxygen atom and touching both the hydrogen and the oxygen atoms shown. All atoms have different sizes when they combine with other atoms, so it is not hard to understand why the SM says that they do not have definite boundaries. Fortunately, when a particular pair of atoms combine together they keep the same relative sizes as they shrink or expand with an increase or decrease in temperature. No attempt will be made to explain why atoms become gases, which allows them to occupy a much larger volume than they should. For now, all explanations will be limited to the liquid and solid phases for which atom construction remains identical. If it isn't clear yet, the reason that water is a liquid as shown in the construction of Figure 2 is that there is no reason for the hydrogen atoms not to move around on the surfaces of two adjacent oxygen atoms. The two oxygen atoms are not physically attached, so they do not limit each others rotation ability. The hydrogen atoms are bonded in different ways between the two oxygen atoms, therefore they also are not limited in how they will rotate about each oxygen atom. It is possible to determine if the size of the atoms and the configuration of the water molecule proposed in Figure 2 is correct by providing a similar physical description to the common solid phase of H2O, 1h ice. First, it is necessary to explain why water become less dense as it freezes into ice. Cooling the water molecules makes the oxygen and hydrogen atoms shrink. Because the hydrogen atoms are attached to adjacent oxygen atoms, at some point the structure undergoes a transition that makes the hydrogen atoms take up new positions that completely separate the two oxygen atoms that each hydrogen is touching—this requires ultrawave theory concepts to explain thoroughly, so it will have to wait for now. Even though the atoms are shrinking the transition of a separation of the oxygen atoms presents itself as an expansion. Figure 3 below shows one form of a single frozen water molecule, which uses the assumption of a perfect world where there are no irregularities or impurities to affect the shape of the structure created. In this case, the molecules would create a square grid of alternating atoms rotated at 90° from each other. In reality, a 180° separation of the hydrogen atoms cannot form naturally. What actually happens is that a group of atoms form a physically stable structure that is more like a pyramid or some other polygonal structure. Once the atom structure is formed, it then locks in adjacent molecules by restricting their motions, which is why ice seems to spread out from different locations within the whole of the liquid volume.
Figure 3 Numbers for the dimensions of Figure 3 are multiplied by 1E-10m. Figure 3 is from a cad model and is based on a density calculated radius of 1.597667E-10m, which is that of ice at 0°C. The sizes of the two atoms are calculated from the original values of the radius for the oxygen atom (R=1.552E-10m) and the hydrogen atom (R=4.115072E-11m) by using identical reduction ratios to get from the liquid phase to the solid phase. It is assumed that the reductions due to temperature are proportional for both atoms. It is also assumed that the hydrogen atoms position themselves directly between two oxygen atoms. The ratio assumption in mathematical form is: 1.552E-10 / X = 4.115072E-11 / Y Where X and Y are the new atom sizes that sum to 1.597667E-10m. The angle between hydrogen atoms changes from 104.45° to other values as the sizes of the two atoms shrink until the hydrogen atoms reach a point midway between two oxygen atoms, where they become locked into place. Normal 1h ice has been shown to have bond angles that vary from about 80° to as much as 140°. This indicates various types of 3D structures are formed within the matrix of the ice. Ice continues to shrink as it cools. For example, its density is 916.7 kg/m3 at 0°C but continues to rise to 934 kg/m3 at -180°C, which indicates further contraction of the atoms. As the size of the oxygen radius goes down so does the hydrogen radius, so one would think that the whole molecule would shrink, which is why the SM has such unusual characteristics applied to the behavior of atoms when making molecules and for phase changes. The SM does not take into account a simple physical behavior where the hydrogen is shifting to a position between two adjacent oxygen atoms and causing the two oxygen atoms to separate. This simple physical behavior explains perfectly why water molecules shrink first then expand when freezing and then start to shrink again. If an oxygen atom was found to be a positive nuclei atom, then electrons would attach the hydrogen atoms to the oxygen atom, but even if oxygen is found to be a negative nuclei atom, the proton core of the hydrogen atoms could connect directly to the oxygen core. The presence or absence of electrons will change the molecule size only minutely, so they are of no help in determining which way the atoms are connected. What does help is the spin direction of the hydrogen atoms, as their spin is reversed from that of any oxygen atoms they contact directly, and in the same direction if separated by an electron. This type of spin, which is associated with the combining of atoms into molecules is know by the term chirality. You may be thinking that what I have just presented is just some rare coincidence that I have exploited to force a fit to a ball bearing style model, and does not apply beyond what I have shown here. I can understand your hesitancy to accept this evidence. Now I will show you that it works for at least one other of the fourteen documented configurations of ice. I have not tried to fit it to the other configurations because I don't have the proper information. I don't see any reason to expect a different outcome, as the types of ice are only different in their physical geometries due to temperature and pressure variations. The following paper (use link below) is the only place I have found where work has been done to determine unambiguously how ice is physically arranged. The experimenters were able to create structured molecules by having the insight to think of confining the number of atoms to a two-molecule deep formation. Not only does this make it easier to see the results, it helps to keep the arrangement order as close to perfect as is humanly possible. A new cad model was created using a further proportional reduction of the radii of the atoms to fit the experimentally measured size of 2.73 angstroms (2.73E-10m) as the space between the oxygen atoms. The radius of 1.262832E-10m for oxygen was reduced to 1.078927E-10m and the radius of 0.334835E-10m for hydrogen was reduced to 0.286073E-10m to fit the measured 1.365E-10m molecular radius of the nanohex experiment. Figure 4 shows the resulting model using the same configuration angles as those of the nanohex experiment.
Figure 4 The left hand figure in Figure 4 is the same as the "A" configuration of the nanohex model. The other two figures are also "A's", but they have been rotated in some manner. The green dot indicates a molecule that is on the top hexagon and that has two hydrogen atoms attached in the plane of the hex. The gold dot is for an identical molecule on the bottom hex. Some of the oxygen atoms have one hydrogen in the plane of the hex and one attached to the oxygen in the plane directly above or below it. When a dot is rotated 180° in the plane of the figure (hex plane) it changes color to indicate it has switched from top to bottom, or vice versa. The arrow shows the rotation direction (chirality) of the oxygen atoms, which are all the same for any particular hex in the matrix. The right hand figure is essentially a 180° rotation of the top figure. The top figure represents flipping the left hand figure upside down across an imaginary line between the two figures. Once the correct configuration was modeled accurately, the question that needed answered was "why does the ice lock into this particular hex pattern?". It would have to be a specific physical event that catalysed a change from motion to immobility. The event would start a chain reaction, so it doesn't have to happen everywhere, just in one hex. It also must have a physical construction that can be easily characterized. The simplest answer is that of inserting a molecule of the 180° sort shown in Figure 3 into the hex pattern, which instantly locks that hex into position. It takes only one defective molecule to affect a change that spreads to many others that do not have it. There is probably a limit to the number of atoms that can be held in place like this, but no attempt has been made to characterize that limit.
Figure 5 Trying to insert the same size molecule as the ones shown in Figure 4 into the hex pattern showed a discrepancy of about 3 percent from allowing the molecule to fit. Changing the spacing from 2.73 angstroms can't affect the distribution of sizes in any appreciable way, since they are all relative, so the angles must be changed to allow the inserted molecule to fit. The reported error bar of ±2° for the experiment gives a fairly large leeway within which to work. The text used in Figure 5 is a little small and hard to read, so the changes needed to complete the fit are from 108° to 107.4°, 118.5° to 119.138°, and from 133.5° to 133.462°. These changes are approximately 0.6 degrees for the large and small angles, while keeping the mid-sized one relatively unchanged. There was a wide range of angles within the ±2° error bar that would work, but the 119.138° angle does not vary more than a few tenths of a degree in either direction. For example, another set of values that work is 107.667°, 119.176, and 133.158, which shows more than a six-to-one change ratio for the small and large angles as compared to that of the middle-sized angle, which just happens to be the one that is most tightly controlled by the inserted molecule. The following are two statements within the nano-hex paper confirming that the same type of hexagonal shapes are created using different pressures followed by a summation statement that you will find has a simple explanation when viewed from the ball bearing style model of atom structure. I did not include the experimenter's Figure 4, as you can look at it in the paper by using the link provided above. "These structures are obtained under the load of 1 GPa." "We also confirmed that the solid phase that occurs under the lower loads (50 and 150 MPa) has the same crystalline structure." The above statement shows that it is the restriction of the molecules to a two-deep layering that is responsible for the hex shape and that pressure is not a factor. "Finally, we notice that in the freezing transition the system contracts when it is under loads of 50 and 150 MPa, whereas it expands under 1 GPa (see Fig. 4). This behavior is surprising in light of the fact that bulk water expands when it freezes to ice Ih. Since the difference in volume and entropy between the two phases have the same sign, when the load is low, the slope of the liquid-solid coexistence line in the T - Pzz phase diagram should be positive. On the other hand, when the load is above ~1 GPa the slope becomes negative. For ice Ih however, the slope is always negative." First, it must be clear that in a spherical ball model of atoms pressure and temperature are almost interchangeable when talking about an atom's physical size. What we have with the above statement is a result that is indicative of a shift in the T-P diagram. It is similar to a redshift diagram, which moves the frequencies of light either up or down on the scale in response to the velocity of the emitting source. Here the atoms are pressure shrunken before they can achieve the hex structure. If the pressure is greater than a certain threshold point, the atoms will expand to fill the void. If the pressure is lower than the threshold, it will contract further to fill the void. A rotation of the atoms about each other similar to that seen with normal water to 1h ice formation is what locates the atoms into the hex pattern. Although it was not stated, it is assumed that the volume of the two-layer atom trap does not change between pressure settings. What you should have learned here is that sizing a pair of atoms by the method of treating them as spherical balls to produce the known size of a water molecule is interesting, but unremarkable in itself. Further scaling the atoms down from that size to show how a phase transition from liquid to solid occurs is worthy of attention, but not earth shattering in its evidentiary forcefulness. Scaling them down further, however, to correctly reproduce yet another type of liquid to solid phase transition is an extraordinarily momentous event. This should not be possible in the SM view of how our Universe is constructed. Having looked at the evidence above, you should be asking yourself how many other things you believe about the SM are not true. |
