DA Morgan

Hey, I am just repeating what they put in their press release.

They are the ones who said current models would show little effect from the quarks in this matter, not me. They are the experts who designed this experiment, not me. I do not have millions of dollars to spend on experiments and must rely on mainstream researchers. It is their *** on the line to produce results for the millions spent on their research.

But do not take my word for it, do a web search on RHIC like I did and read the press releases they put out. But before you do, here is some feedback on the links you provided.

I did go the the Harvard link you gave and noticed they are using the MIT bag theory as the base for that abstract. I mentioned the MIT bag theory before as on of the few that had similarities to my theory. Both of our theories suggest lower that observed mass for quarks due to high energy density. Are you finally supporting my conclusions in your posts?

In this link you gave, http://www.bnl.gov/bnlweb/pubaf/pr/PR_display.asp?prID=06-55 the RHIC team said "the quarks account for only about 20 percent of the proton?s spin." This was what I said in my post, little of the proton's spin comes from the quarks under current models. 20 percent is a little amount is it not. Thanks again for your help in supporting my theory.

In this link you gave, http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=00045917-8887-1C6A-84A9809EC588EF21 "collisions of spin-aligned protons at RHIC will allow us to tease apart the individual contributions of both the quarks and the gluons." And that may reveal the source of the mysterious spin. --Sarah Graham" Which is why I thought this experiment could prove fruitful to my work. Thanks again for your support.

This link you gave http://www.iucf.indiana.edu/experiments/STAR/ Is based on quantum chromodynamics just like my theory is, how convenient. Maybe I should hire you as a researcher for my work, you do it so well.

The last link you gave, http://focus.aps.org/story/v12/st5 I could not have done a better job of writing it myself. "In the late 1980s, however, experimental evidence began to show that much of a proton's spin comes from so-called orbital motion of the quarks relative to each other, rather than from their individual spins. In addition, it became apparent that quark-antiquark pairs and other particles continually flit in and out of existence inside a proton, all influencing the proton's characteristics." Perfect, I could not have said it better myself. A great link I may use in my papers. Excellent job of supporting my theory.

Please continue to put such high quality links in your posts, it will make my work much easier.

My only mistake was in the wording of my post in one line where I over simplified things to save space and typing. Of course that would be the one line you noticed. I guess I must proofread all my posts, go into excessive detail so as to leave no doubt as to my meaning, and throw in a few physics lessons and history for those not conversant in such matters.

Please give me a break. This is a thread on the NOT-QUITE-SCIENCE-FORUM not a paper for publication. I tend to over simplify my posts as most who may read it are not that well informed. I choose this thread for my topic so I would not have to be so exact in my posts and overwhelm the average reader, that and due to the early stage of my work.

If I had to go into detail, a forum is not the place. Most people will never go to those links I gave and read all the info on those and the links which lead from them to other work, and there is a lot I did not give links to, if someone was interested, then I would provide a link. You did not go to my links and read them carefully, most will not. If I put it all here, no one would look at it as it would run over 20 pages in length.

Almost your entire post supported my theory, but you have not looked into it deep enough to know that. The only valid point you made was on the subject of "gluons" and "scalar waves" So please enlighten me with your knowledge of particle/wave duality, quantum field theory, wave mechanics, scalar waves and the proper way to describe the interactions between the quarks.

Are "gluons" discrete particles or wave interactions? Can you tell me how they "act like little springs" in quark confinement? Show me the math on how these "particles" exert an attractive force on the quarks, or a decent link and not a one paragraph abstract with no details. Then we can have a valid and informed discussion on this matter.

I look forward to any more links you provide, it will save me from supporting my theory alone. You have been of great help in this matter, please keep up the good work.