Comay Model vs. the Standard Model

This page briefly compares the Standard Model with Comay’s model. You can see here the large scope of Comay model and its clear advantages over the Standard Model.

Physical subject Standard Model Comay Model
Basics
Massive parts in baryons 3 quarks* 3 quarks in the external shell + core + inner quark shells*
Massive parts in mesons Quark and antiquark* Quark and antiquark*
Strong interaction – quarks carry colors
– only particles that contain equal amount of all colors (“white”) can be detected
– Gluons carry the force between quarks
– Each gluon carries color and anticolor
– the force that attracts quarks increases with interparticles’ distance
– Force derives from the SU(3) Yang-Mills group
– quarks are magnetic monopoles obeying the regular theory
– Baryons contain a magnetically charged core that attracts quarks
– Quarks repel each other
– Quark and antiquark attract each other
– Force laws are analogous to electrodynamics
Experimental findings related to the additional mass in the baryons
Linear momentum of valence quarks is 45% of the proton momentum Weak explanation (gluons carry this mass) Easily explained (baryonic core carries this mass)
Increase in very high energy proton-proton elastic cross section Unexplained [1,2] Easily explained (here)
Problems with differences between mesons and baryons (here) Some untreated and some have weak explanation Easily explained (here)
Findings regarding similarity between van der Waals and nuclear force
Similarity of the potential vs distance graph Untreated Easily explained (here)
Nucleons within the atomic nucleus have a practically uniform density Untreated Easily explained (here)
First EMC effect No accepted explanation [8,9] Easily explained (here)
Findings regarding the force between quarks
Protons and Neutrons behave similarly when a hard photon hits them Wrong explanation (VMD contradicts special relativity) (here) Easily explained (here)
Protons and Neutrons interact strongly when a hard photon hits them Wrong explanation (VMD contradicts special relativity) (here) Easily explained (here)
Antiquarks have a larger volume inside nucleons Untreated Easily explained (here)
The relation between the proton radius and pion radius Untreated Easily explained (here)
The neutron’s negative electric charge tends to be found in external regions Untreated Easily explained (here)
New particles and materials
Pentaquarks were not found Unexplained. Search still continues [3-5] Failure is easily explained (here)
Strange Quark Matter was not found Unexplained. Search still continues [6] Failure is easily explained (here)
Glue Balls were not found Unexplained. Search still continues [7] Failure is easily explained (here)
Other experimental findings
The nuclear tensor force and its sign Untreated Explained (here)
The neutron’s electric dipole moment vanishes Explained Explained (here)
Quark confinement Explained Explained (here)
The Omega- and Delta++ features Explained Explained (here)
The proton spin crisis No explanation Explained (here)
Strong CP Problem No explanation accepted by the community Explained (here)
Predictions
High energy pion-pion cross section Every result will be hard to explain Will decrease for increasing energy (here)
Pion’s linear momentum About half will be carried by gluons (like in the proton) Will be carried only by the quark-antiquark pair (here)
Mean-square charge radius of the Sigma+ baryon 0.581-0.820 0.85-1.17 (here)
Not related to the strong force
Higgs boson Must be found in LHC Will not be found (here)
Not related to Standard Model
Failure to find Dirac magnetic monopoles Search still continues Will not be found

* According to field theory, system contains also quark-antiquark pairs in a certain probability

[1] A. A. Arkhipov (http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-ph/pdf/9911/9911533v2.pdf)
[2] E. Comay Apeiron, 16, 1 2009 (http://redshift.vif.com/JournalFiles/V16NO1PDF/V16N1COM.pdf)
[3] C. Gignoux, B. Silvestre-Brac and J. M. Richard, Phys. Lett. 193, 323 1987
[4] H. J. Lipkin, Phys. Lett. 195, 484 1987
[5] C.G. Wohl, in the 2009 report of PDG (http://pdg.lbl.gov/2009/reviews/rpp2009-rev-pentaquarks.pdf)
[6] E. Witten, Phys. Rev. D 30, 272 1984 and read the conclusion in this recently published article: Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 092302 2009 K. Han, et al
[7] The Experimental Status of Glueballs, V. Crede and C. A. Meyer, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 63, 74, 2009
[8] J. J. Aubert et al. (EMC), Phys. Lett., 123B, 275 1983
[9] J. Arrington et al., J. Phys. Conference Series 69, 012024 2007

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “Comay Model vs. the Standard Model

    • All the phenomena here labeled as “unexplained” are phenomena which leading scientists claim that they are unexplained, or no one claims to have an explanation. You can see that in the references brought here.
      Regarding the phenomena which comay model explains – links are provided to the relevant articles.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s