· Density ρ: Elemental bosonic density varies from electron’s to uranium’s , while corresponding fermionic densities are to . It reveals an invisible condensed matter field over 10100 denser than the vacuum field thus, visible reality floats in a pool of very dense invisible (“dark”) particulate matter. Notably, bosonic densities of the chemical elements sum up to give vacuum material density and the cosmological lambda , Obande .
· Centripetal force F: As shown in Table 1, it motivates quite a number of effects: electrical, Equations (10), (12); magnetic, Equation (11); mechanical, Equation (2) and spatial dimension in both the boson and fermion fields. We attribute the bosonic field correlation coefficient to the strong nuclear force SNF, it holds matter together on all scales from the atom to cosmos, Obande .
· Elastic (tensile) modulus є: Vacuum material modulus varies across the chemical periodicity from e’s to , corresponding values for the fermionic field are to 2.21 × 1012 Pa for e to U respectively. Since the values refer to the isolated atom, the results reveal a highly elastic electromagnetic e-m vacuum spacetime fabric.
· Strain τ: Intrinsic strain rate on the elemental bosonic quantum varies across the chemical periodicity from 2.12 × 10−11% to 0.10% for electron to uranium, corresponding values for condensed matter are 3.49 × 1011% to 8.6 × 1016%. The values follow from the quantitative expression where ϑ, ω and c are oscillation frequency, angular speed and the transverse field respectively, for the vacuum “m·s−1” and for condensed matter “m·s−1”. Strain correlates with a number of other physical properties to manifest electro-magnetism, mechanical properties and spatial dimensions, Obande , a small sample is presented in Table 4.
3.2. Observational Effects of Intrinsic Rotation
Recall that complex torques (Equations (3), (8), (10), (11) and (12), Table 1 are simple torques in perpetual motion in free space or in matter; some, e.g., (3), combine tangential and angular motions, others, e.g., (8), (11) and (12) execute sub- and super-luminal velocities, i.e., , and vo, where , yet others, e.g., (10) attribute to only angular speed. A detailed presentation of the subject would lengthen this report far beyond the intended scope; we highlight only some key observational effects.
3.2.1. Metric Expansion of Space and Matter
All natural spatial periodic quanta are ellipsoids, see, e.g., the “Static Sky”, New Castle  and the galaxies in Galaxy . The morphology provides an important clue to the profile of metric space expansion, there are only two straight (axial) lines in an ellipsoid—the major and minor axes; in cosmic envelopes these two directions are totally forbidden on account of the (galactic) nucleus; in condensed matter the nucleus is encased in a shell of fermionic matter but, on account of gravity, remains impassable. In nature, therefore, projectiles circumvent the nucleus and trace only geodesics (parabolas), see Physics Forum.org . The “Static Sky” provides an excellent perspective, condensed matter fields are constrained within the vertical cylindrical elliptic envelope, it constrains expansion to within the toriod. A superluminal tangential velocity that traces a larger ellipsoid creates the impression of radial acceleration of space, Castelvicchi , Nielson et al. , Brax , Billings , it is motivated by the bosonic field coupling , (m rad s−1)−2; theoretical analysis yields the expansion rate , notably, it is measurable as the vacuum characteristic (“atmospheric electrostatic charge”) 8.5 × 10−19 “C”, Obande .
3.2.2. Motions in Free Space and in Condensed Matter
In free space the complex torque field motivates spontaneous translational motion, i.e., inertia, Lynden-Bell  of bodies including galaxies, stars, satellites, comets, et cetera; notably, these motions are not random events, each occurs within a well-defined trajectory fixed at formation of the body. Of particular interest in this class of motions is the seeming expansion of space broached above but belongs to a very rich subject that touches upon the details of birth, growth and death of matter. In condensed matter, bonding restricts the “primary” motion modes of Equations (3), (8), (10), (11) and (12) to within a limited radius resulting in a “secondary” mode that comprises mostly rotation and vibration about fixed axes. The secondary mode gives rise to vital observational effects: spin identifies, of course, with the primitive torque fields quantitatively expressed in Γau and Γnu, Equation (4); orbital motion or revolution identifies with angular motion, see Equation (10), and recession attributes to a coupling having only rectilinear dimension as in Equations (8), (11), (12). Of course, the rectilinear dimension refers to tangential motion which, as noted above, creates the illusion of radial expansion. In reality it refers to a process that gradually transforms a given elliptical envelope to a larger one until the envelope disintegrates and disappears spewing its content into vacuum space as asteroid, comet, other trans-stellar/galactic voyager which eventually also disintegrates and disappears into the void. The process is the universal scale-free death process of all matter, atomic, elemental, stellar, galactic, chemical, geological and biological bodies, Obande .
Observe that the mobile torque field informs: 1) Newton’s second law of motion where it accounts for sundry perpetual motion including: axial spin, orbital motion, and recession from the center e.g. moon from earth, BBC.com ; bulk expansion of cosmological bodies, e.g., earth, Diaz , sun, Appell  and expansion of the galaxy, Sciama, , Wall . 2) Random Thermal (Brownian) Motion which, of course, is a condensed-phase internal motion limited by chemical bond to localized translational, rotational, vibrational, rocking and twisting modes. Interestingly, energies of these secondary modes quantize alongside the primary modes; as is well known, it enables applications in a variety of high-precision analytical devices, see, e.g., Levine (1988). 3) Kinetic Molecular Theory KT; Equations (8), (11) and (12) give the free-space tangential velocities (v/m·s−1): ; , and . It implicates moving torque fields in the familiar effects associated with random (thermal) motion whose observational root-mean-square velocity . Substitution of electron molar and atomic mass values, and , yields and 1.004 × 1027 respectively. The molar value 8.724 × 104 m·s−1 tallies with and speaks well in favor of consistency of both KT and the present classical mechanics CM approach; however, bosonic electron’s presents an entirely new speed limit scenario. KT is well established, it serves here to cross-check the values obtained with the CM approach. The indication here of existence in nature of velocity on the order of 1027 m·s−1 comes with tremendous implications specifically for on-going neutrino research but, the subject must await further investigation. The analysis clearly indicates that much of chemical kinetics and thermodynamics, particularly the concepts of enthalpy, entropy and thermodynamic temperature scale, easily trace to physics of the mobile torque field.
3.2.3. Internal Pressure σ of the Quantum Envelope
Atomic stress (internal pressure) evaluates with , Obande . The value varies across the chemical periodicity from bosonic electron’s 6.18 × 10−58 to uranium’s 10−19 Pa, corresponding values for particulate e to U are 5.56 × 109 to 1.96 × 1031 Pa. In other words, the fermionic energy packet is some fifty orders of magnitude more internally pressurized than its bosonic conjugate. Burkert et al.  recently reported the value ; theoretical analysis gives and 6.12 × 1021 for the visible proton and its invisible (mass generation) analogue respectively. Correct situation of the empirical and theoretical values requires unambiguous identification of the experimental proton’s phase, Obande , i.e., its candidature among the three particle generations. We present in Table 5 σ values of some elements in our visible and in its invisible analogue ; clearly, H+ does not register with in any ref. frame. The theoretical analysis therefore suggests a possibility that either the experimental set up over-estimates σproton or, a rogue non-visible particulate element other than the proton is involved. We must, however, observe that in the course of this project we have uncovered significant divergences between theoretical and empirical atomic property values, e.g., a whopping twenty-order magnitude exists between electron empirical rest mass 9.1 × 10−31 and theoretical value 7.37 × 10−51 kg·atom−1, Obande . However, there is no doubt that Burkert et al.  ’s result makes an indispensable contribution to the position that the condensed matter energy packet is a highly pressurized vessel, see Zhou .
4. Summary and Conclusions
· Internal stress of a periodic quantum field correlates with the energy packet’s radius to generate the intrinsic torque Γ that motivates spontaneous rotation of matter, its atomic and natural units are electron’s bosonic and fermionic .
· The evidence suggests that the field parameter differentiates radially in a convergent infinite series within the envelope to produce effects attributed to “spooky-action-at-a-distance” such as observed in Newtonian gravitation and in spatial electric potential gradient.
· An earlier report was cited to inform that in addition to stress and radius, several other field parameters correlate to generate torque; for instance, the all-too-familiar fundamental constant 1.6022 × 10−19 attributes to the correlation coefficient of three different parametric couplings: ; and where ρ, τ, and ϑ are flux density, strain and frequency and indices p and w denote fermionic and bosonic fields respectively.
· As a result of intrinsic rotation, all bodies possess characteristic harmonic motion parameters including frequency, radius, mass, density, centripetal force, modulus, stress and strain. Since aggregate waveforms of the chemical elements constitute the vacuum field, Obande , the vacuum is actually an ideal elastic body defined with SHM properties of elemental waveforms; notably, the vacuum-value (amplitude) of a given property is not an average but sum total of values of elements of the chemical periodicity; e.g., vacuum density sums up to give the cosmological lambda, Obande .
· The correlations describe conic sections, it accounts for ellipsoidal morphology of cosmic objects and rules out any notion of linear trajectory in nature, all seeming linear motions are tangential to larger geodesics; in other words, metric space cannot expand radially, it is an angular phenomenon.
· As found in previous cases, theoretical results in this series call for caution in making deductions from particle physics experiments; we find, consistently, results which suggest that experimental energy regimes often diverge markedly from theoretical values. In the case in point, Burkert et al.’s recently reported proton internal pressure differs significantly from the theoretical value of each of the proton’s three particle generations, specifically, and 6.11 × 1021 in , and respectively. Theoretical analysis reveals that σ value in the neighborhood of 1035 registers only for invisible (“dark-matter”) trans-bromium elements, not earlier.
· Restricted rotation in condensed matter creates all manner of modes of motion including, random thermal (Brownian), vibtrational, bending, rocking, twisting, et cetera. These modes are quantized in line with the causal harmonics, they manifest the spectrum of effects quantitatively associated with thermodynamics, kinetics and, in particular, kinetic-molecular theory. Most notably, the present CM approach leads to evaluation of the root-mean-square velocity for which electron waveform’s , gives ; this result, suggesting existence of an imponderable hyper-luminal velocity, comes with important implications for on-going neutrino research, it is, however, set aside for further investigation.
The investigation has succeeded in explicitly accounting for the “mystery” of rotation such as proton spin, Moscowitz ; if taken with our earlier report on morphology of cosmological bodies, the present results point to a link between rotation and figure of celestial bodies St Katlin . Notably, “gravitational accretion” is not in any way implicated in intrinsic rotation, Giuli . It has become customary, in concluding a report of an investigation in this series, to call attention to the sheer power of the unassuming expression ; it, of course, equates energies of the composite wave and particulate forms of the atom and in effect quantifies the atom’s essence and therein lies its analytical power. We do not think a simpler, yet more powerful, dual energy quantification is feasible, therefore, we submit the Planck-Einstein-de Broglie (PEB) mass equation the ultimate simplification of The Theory of Everything. In order to demonstrate its incredible simplicity and awesome analytical power, we have, quite deliberately, used the PEB to address areas considered intractable in the reigning physics paradigm, e.g., origin of the three-particle generations and identity of “dark” matter/energy, Obande ; elemental intrinsic atomic e-m resonance frequency, ϑ-value, Obande ; common causality of gravitation, electricity and magnetism, Obande ; atomic mass phenomenology, Obande ; cosmological constant phenomenology, Obande ; the photon’s identity, Obande ; phenomenology of the fundamental physical constants, Obande  and herein, origin of intrinsic rotation of matter. We have, in each case, submitted compelling positions that as yet await independent assessment. The goal is to assemble what would eventually become foundational materials of an all-embracing classical atomic theory with which an observational theory of nature is realizable. We think, even without going further, we have already assembled sufficient materials for development of an observational theory of nature.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.
Ellis, G. and Silk, J. (2014) Scientific Method: Defend the Integrity of Physics. Nature, 516, 321-323.
Beth, R.A. (1936) Mechanical Detection and Measurement of the Angular Momentum of Light. Physical Review, 50, 115-125.
Leach, J., Courtial, J., Sheldon, K., et al. (2004) Interferometer Methods to Measure Orbital and Spin or the Total Angular Momentum of a Single Photon. Physical Review Letters, 92, Article ID: 013601.
|||Jaffe, R.L. (1995) Where Does the Proton Get Its Rotation. Physics Today, 48, 24-30.|
Peterson, I. (1997) “Proton-Go-Round”—Where Does the Proton Get Its Spin? Science News, 152, 158-159.
Raghuprasad, P.K. (2013) Planetary Spin-Orbit Attributes in the Solar System and Their Wider Implications. Physics Essays, 26, 331-338.
Tsati, A., Lyubenova, M., et al. (2017) CALIFA Reveals Prolate Rotation in Massive Early-Type Galaxies: A Polar Galaxy Merger Origin? Astronomy & Astrophysics, 606, A62.
McClintock, J.E., Shafee, R. and Narayan, R. (2006) The Spin of the Near Black Hole GRS 1915 + 105. The Astrophysical Journal, 652, 518-539.
Imanishi, M., Nakanishi, K., Izumi, T. and Wada, K. (2018) Alma Reveals an Inhomogeneous Compact Rotating Dense Molecular Torus at NGC 1068 Nucleus. The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 853, L25.
|||Williams, J.G. and Mark, M.B. (1997) Is the Electron a Photon with Toriodal Topology? Annales de la Fondation Louis de Broglie, 22, 133.|
Shea, S.B. (2017) How Did the Proton Get Its Spin?
Spagna, G. (2018) Why and How Do Planets Rotate?
Palacios, A. (2013) Influence of Rotation on Stellar Evolution.
Benesch, C. (2013) Why Does Every Astronomical Object Rotate? Where Has the Angular Momentum Come from?
Crawford, C. (2013) Rotation in Space. Atronomy Lectures, Gresham College, Cambridge.
Young, A. (2018) How Does Space Being Curved Make Gravity Pull Us Down? Physics Discussion Forum.org.
Dirac, P.A.M. (1928) The Quantum Theory of the Electron. Proceedings of the Royal Society A, 117, 610.
Dirac, P.A.M. (1939) The Relation between Mathematics and Physics. Proceedings of the Royal Society, 59, 122-129.
Born, M. (1935) The Mysterious Number.
Golubev, S.N. (2014) The Emergence and Existence of Life in the World of Elements and the Physical Vacuum. Achievements in the Life Sciences, 8, 1-9.
Obande, O.P. (2017) On the Fundamental Physical Constants: I. Phenomenology. Applied Physics Research, 9, 42.
|||Hossenfelder, S. (2018) Lost in Math: How Beauty Led Physics Astray. Basic Books, New York.|
Wilczek, F. (2018) Comment on: Has Elegance Betrayed Physics? Physics Today, 71, 57.
Rugh, S.E. and Zinkernagel, H. (2001) The Qunantum Vacuum and the Cosmological Constant Problem.
Rees, M.J. (1985) Galaxies and Their Nuclei. The Bakerian Lecture, 1982. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A, 400, 183.
Cross, D.J. (2015) The Physical Origin of Torque and the Rotational Second Law. American Journal of Physics, 83, 121-125.
Gorbatyy, I.N. and Tarsov, A.A. (2017) Another Comment on: “The Physical Origin of Torque and of the Second Law”. American Journal of Physics, 85, 315-317.
Obande, O.P. (2017b) On the Fundamental Physical Constants: II. Field Coupling Geometry. Applied Physics Research, 9, 62.
SCIAM (2013) Physicists Debate Whether the World Is Made of Particles or Fields—Or Something Else Entirely.
Kuhlman, M. (2013) What Is Real?
|||Descartes, R. (1644) Prinzipien Philisophie. Teil 3, van der Sichtharen Welt, Absnitt. 23.|
Madelung, E. (1927) Quantum Theory in Hydrodynamic Form. Zeitschrift für Physik, 40, 322-326.
Macken, J.A. (2011) The Universe Is Only Space.
Hobson, A. (2013) There Are No Particles, There Are Only Fields. American Journal of Physics, 81, 211-223.
Obande, O.P. (2013) Notes on Russellian Cosmogony—Part 1: Absolute Atomic Mass. International Journal of Engineering Science, 2, 68.
Consiglio, J. (2015) How and Why the Universe Is Natural. Applied Scientific Research, 7, 69.
Kirakosyan, G. (2015) Deduction of the Coupling Constant (a ≈ 1/137) as a Wave Perculiarity: Possible Laboratory Confirmation. Physics Essays, 28, 283-285.
Wilczek, F. (1998) The Persistence of the Ether. Physics Today, 52, 11-13.
Colbeck, R. and Renner, R. (2012) Is a System’s Wave Function in One-to-One Correspondence with Its Elements of Reality? Physical Review Letters, 108, Article ID: 150402.
|||Laidlaw, A. (2017) Relativity and the Luminal Structure of Matter. Progress in Physics, 13, 35.|
Musser, G. (2018) What Is Spacetime?
Good Elf (2016) Theory of Particles Based on Vortices.
Obande, O.P. (2016) Atomic Mass: Origin, Units and Constants. Applied Physics Research, 8, 92.
Obande, O.P. (2018) A Field Concept of the Black Hole. Applied Physics Research, 10, 66-80.
Obande, O.P. (2015) Notes on Russellian Cosmogony. II. A Procedure for Theoretical Calculation of Relative Atomic Mass and Internal Energy, Physics Essays, 28, 78.
Obande, O.P. (2015) Classical Definitions of Gravitation, Electricity and Magnetism. Applied Physics Research, 7, 85.
Macken, J.A. (2015) Spacetime Based Foundation of Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity. In: Nascimento, M. and Maruani, J., Eds., Osvaldo Goscinski (1938-2013), Springer, Berlin, Vol. 29, 219-245.
|||Emiliani, C. (1992) Planet Earth, Cosmology, Geology and Evolution of Life and Environment. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 601-604.|
Obande, O.P. (2016) On the Photon’s Identity: Implications for Relativity and Cosmology. Applied Physics Research, 8, 10.
|||Levine, I.N. (1998) Physical Chemistry. 3rd Edition, McGraw-Hill, New York, 440-450.|
Obande, O.P. (2016b) A Classical Perspective of the Cosmological Constant. Physics Essays, 29, 228-231.
New Atlas (2016) Static Universe.
Galaxy (2018) Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia.
Castelvecchi, D. (2016) Measurement of Universe’s Expansion Rate Creates Cosmological Puzzle. Nature News & Comments.
Nielson, J.T., Guffanti, A. and Sakar, S. (2016) Marginal Evidence for Cosmic Acceleration from Type 1A Supernovae. Scientific Reports, 6, Article No. 35596.
Brax, P. (2018) What Makes the Universe Accelerate? Reports on Progress in Physics, 81, Article ID: 016901.
Billings, L. (2018) Cosmic Conflict: Diverging Data on Universe’s Expansion Polarizes Scientists.
Lynden-Bell, D. (1967) On the Origins of Space-Time and Inertia. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 135, 413-428.
BBC.com (2011) Why the Moon Is Getting Further Away from the Earth. BBC News, July.
Diaz, L. (2018) Africa Is Splitting into Two Continents.
Appell, D. (2008) The Sun Will Eventually Engulf Earth—Maybe.
Sciama, D.W. (1969) Is the Galaxy Losing Mass on a Time Scale of a Billion Years? Nature, 224, 1263-1267.
Wall, M. (2018) The Milky Way Is Growing Faster than the Speed of Sound.
Burkert, V.D., Elouadrhini, L. and Girod, F.X. (2018) Pressure Distribution inside the Proton. Nature, 557, 396-399.
Zhou, M. (2003) A New Look at the Atomic Level Virial Stress: On Continuum- Molecular System Equivalence. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A, 459, 2347-2392.
Moskowitz, C. (2014) Proton Spin Mystery Gains a New Clue. Scientific American.
St. Katlin, N. (1961) On the Rotation and Figure of Celestial Bodies. Astronomische Nachrichten, 286, 157.
Giuli, R.T. (1968) On the Rotation of the Earth Produced by Gravitational Accretion. Science, 8, 301-323.
Copyright © 2020 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.
This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.