Quantum Chromodynamics a subset of the Standard Model of Particle Physics gives a very accurate mathematical description of the strong force that hold quarks together in protons and neutrons in terms of a gauge theory with the symmetry group of SU(3).
However it does not define how that force physically interacts with them to do that. In other words it mathematically defines a SU(3) group but it does not define how it interacts with our observable environment to create that force.
Despite this shortfall some feel that a physical connection must exist between the math defining Quantum Chromodynamics, the Standard Model of Particle Physics and the physical reality of the observable environment humans occupy because their quantitative predictions so accurately describes the properties and forces associated with quarks. This is true even though gravity which is part of that environment has yet to be incorporated into it.
However the fact that one can mathematically describe properties of an environment does not necessary mean that it accurately depicts its reality.
For example there are many ways to mathematically define why there are five apples on a table. One could say that originally there were six and one was taken away or that there were four and one was added. Both accurately described the observed number of apples on the table. However if originally there were four apples the one that assumed there were six does not define the reality of their environment that produced them.
Similarly there may be several ways to describe the existence quarks.
If so how can we determine which one not only describes what we observe but also defines the reality of the environment that created them?
One way to increasing the possibility of getting it right would to define their environment based on what we observe and then derive its mathematical properties instead of defining them only in terms of its mathematical ones which is what Quantum Chromodynamics does.
For example, observations of the neutron and proton indicate they are made up of distinct components called quarks of which there are six types, the UP/Down, Charm/Strange and Top/Bottom. The Up, Charm and Top have a fractional charge of 2/3. The Down, Strange and Bottom have a fractional charge of 1/3. Scientists have also determined that quarks can take on one of three different configurations they have designated by the colors red, blue, and green. Additionally they tell us the binding energy associated with the strong force is only depended on the distance between them. In other words it does not vary with time
This suggests, because that forces remain constant through time their existence is related to the spatial not the time properties of their environment.
This may be also be the reason why as was mentioned earlier gravity is has not yet been incorporated in it the Standard Model because presently the only viable theory we have; Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity defines it in term of the temporal properties of a spacetime dimension.
However Einstein gave us the ability resolve this conflict when defined his spacetime environment in terms of the constant velocity of light because that allows one to convert a unit of time in it to a unit of space in a one consisting of only four *spatial* dimensions. Additionally because the velocity of light is constant it is possible to defined a one to one correspondence between his spacetime universe and one made up of four *spatial* dimensions.
In other words the symmetry of his mathematics provides a qualitative and quantitative means of redefining his spacetime universe in terms of the geometry of four *spatial* dimensions.
Doing so may allow one to define an environment which is responsible the forces and the fractional charge of quarks and how they interact to form particles in terms of the geometry four *spatial* dimension.
For example the article Defining energy Nov. 26, 2007 showed it is possible to define all forms of energy including electrical in terms of a physical displacement in a "surface" of a threedimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension similar to how Einstein derived gravity in terms of a physical displacement in a spacetime manifold.
However, we as threedimensional beings can only observe three of the four *spatial* dimensions. Therefore, the energy associated with a displacement in its "surface" with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension will be observed by us as being directed along that "surface". However, because two of the threedimensions we can observe are parallel to that surface we will observe it to have 2/3 of the total energy associated with that displacement and we will observe the other 1/3 as being directed along the signal dimension that is perpendicular to that surface.
This means one could define the environment responsible for the 2/3 fractional charge of the Up, Charm and Top may be related to the energy directed along a "surface" of a displaced threedimensional space manifold with respect to a four *spatial* dimension while the 1/3 charge of The Down, Strange and Bottom may be associated with the energy that is directed perpendicular to that "surface".
The reason why quarks come in three configurations or colors with a fractional charge of 1/3 or 2/3 may be because, as was shown in the article Embedded Dimensions Nov. 22, 2007 there are three ways the individual axis of threedimensional space can be oriented with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension. Therefore, the configuration or "colors" of each quark may be related to how its energy is distributed in threedimensional space with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension.
However, it can also explain why it takes three quarks of different "colors" to form a stable particle because, as the article "Why is energy/mass quantized?" Oct, 4 2007 showed one can define one in terms of a resonant system on a "surface" a threedimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension. If the colors of each quark represent the central axis associated with its charge then to form a stable resonate system would require three quarks that have different central axis to balance its energy with respect to the axes of threedimensional space. A particle could not exist if two quarks have the same central axis or color because it would cause an energy imbalance along that axis. Therefore, a particle consisting of anything but quarks of three different colors would not stable.
(Briefly that article showed the four conditions required for resonance to occur in any environment, an object, or substance with a natural frequency, a forcing function at the same frequency as the natural frequency, the lack of a damping frequency and the ability for the substance to oscillate spatial would be available in one consisting of four *spatial* dimensions,
The existence of four *spatial* dimensions would give a continuous nonquantized field of energy/mass (the substance) the ability to oscillate spatially on a "surface" between a third and fourth *spatial* dimensions thereby fulfilling one of the requirements for classical resonance to occur.
These oscillations would be caused by an event such as the decay of a subatomic particle or the shifting of an electron in an atomic orbital. This would force the "surface" of a threedimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension to oscillate with the frequency associated with the energy of that event.
Therefore, these oscillations would meet the requirements mentioned above for the formation of a resonant system or "structure" in space.
Observations of a threedimensional environment show the energy associated with resonant system can only take on the incremental or discreet values associated with a fundamental or a harmonic of the fundamental frequency of its environment.
Similarly the energy associated with resonant systems in four *spatial* dimensions could only take on the incremental or discreet values associated a fundamental or a harmonic of the fundamental frequency of its environment.)
Yet this gives us a method of mathematically deriving the strong force in terms of the physical properties of predefined environment that it is a part of because we know two of its parameters; the electrical forces pushing them apart and the distance between them. Therefore we should be able to determine the magnitude strong force required to prevent that from happening using the geometric relationship describe above.
As was shown earlier the symmetry of Einstein’s mathematics provides a qualitative and quantitative means of redefining gravity in his spacetime universe in terms of the geometry of four *spatial* dimensions.
Doing so would allow for the anchoring the mathematics defining both gravity and the strong force in terms of the physical properties a common environment something which Quantum Chromodynamics and the Standard Model of Particle Physics have been unable to do.
It should be remember Einstein’s genius and the fact that he defined the geometry of spacetime in terms of the constant velocity of light allows us to choose to define our universe in either a spacetime environment or one consisting of four *spatial* dimension when. This interchangeability broadens the environment encompassed by his theories by making them applicable to both the spatial as well as the temporal properties of our universe giving us a new perspective on how the forces it contains interacts with it.
Later Jeff
Copyright 2016 Jeffrey O’Callaghan
Anthology of 
The Reality of the Fourth Spatial Dimension Paperback $9.77 Ebook $6.24 
The Imagineer’s


The Imagineer’s

The Imagineer’s Chronicles Vol. 4 — 2013 Paperback $13.29 Ebook $7.99 
The Imagineer’s 

The Imagineer’s

The Imagineer’s 

The fact that we need two theories to explain the evolution of our universe means that one of them must have originated before the other.
For example Einstein’s relativistic and gravitational theories can explain predict the evolution of the large scale structure and movement of the stars and planets but cannot explain the structure of the atom. Additionally it cannot be used to explain one of the most important aspects of the universe’s evolution: how atoms fuse together in stars to create enough energy to prevent their gravitational collapse. While quantum mechanics explains the small scale structure of atom how they fuse together to prevent that from happening however it cannot be used to explain the evolutionary movement of the stars and planets.
Determining which on of these theory came first is difficult not only because no one was around to observe when they began but because they are defined in different units. For example Einstein theories define the universe in terms of the temporal field properties of a spacetime dimension while quantum theories do so in terms discrete quantized properties of position. However if one can view them in terms of the same units one may be able to determine which one came first by showing how one could have evolved from the other.
Einstein gave us the ability to do this when he used the constant velocity of light in the equation E=mc^2 to define geometric properties of energy/mass because it allows one to convert a unit of time in his four dimensional spacetime universe to a unit of space in a one consisting of only four *spatial* dimensions. Additionally because the velocity of light is constant it is possible to defined a one to one correspondence between his spacetime universe and one made up of four *spatial* dimensions.
In other words it would allow one to define both the evolution of gravity and the quantum mechanical properties of energy/mass in terms of a common property related to their spatial components.
This provides the bases for assuming, as was done in the article “Defining energy?” Nov 27, 2007 that all forms of energy including that associated with gravity and the quantized energy associated with Schrödinger’s wave equation in terms of a spatial displacement in a “surface” of a threedimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension.
For example as was shown in the "Why is energy/mass quantized?" Oct, 4 2007 one can derive the quantum mechanical properties of energy/mass by extrapolating the laws governing resonance in a classical threedimensional environment to a matter wave on a "surface" of a threedimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension.
(Louis de Broglie was the first to predict the existence of a matter wave or the physical equivalent to Schrödinger’s wave equation when he theorized that all particles have a wave component. His theories were confirmed by the discovery of electron diffraction by crystals in 1927 by Davisson and Germer).
Briefly it showed the four conditions required for resonance to occur in a classical Newtonian environment, an object, or substance with a natural frequency, a forcing function at the same frequency as the natural frequency, the lack of a damping frequency and the ability for the substance to oscillate spatial would be meet by a matter wave in a fourdimensional environment.
The existence of four *spatial* dimensions would give a "surface" of a three dimensional space manifold the ability to oscillate spatially with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension thereby fulfilling one of the requirements for classical resonance to occur.
These oscillations would be caused by an event such as the decay of a subatomic particle or the shifting of an electron in an atomic orbital. This would force the "surface" of a threedimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension to oscillate with the frequency associated with the energy of that event.
However these oscillations in four *spatial* dimensions would generate a classically resonating system or "structure" in it because it meets the requirements listed earlier for the creation of one.
These resonant structures are responsible for the quantum mechanical properties of energy/mass.
Yet it also allows one to define the boundary of a quantum system in terms of the geometric properties of four *spatial* dimensions.
For example in classical physics, a point on the twodimensional surface of paper is confined to that surface. However, that surface can oscillate up or down with respect to threedimensional space.
Similarly an object occupying a volume of threedimensional space would be confined to it however, it could, similar to the surface of the paper oscillate “up” or “down” with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension.
The confinement of the “upward” and “downward” oscillations of a threedimension volume with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension is what defines the spatial boundaries associated with a particle in the article "Why is energy/mass quantized?" Oct, 4 2007.
In other words one can understand how the quantum mechanical properties of energy/mass could have evolved from field properties Einstein’s theories if one assumes that it is a result of the resonate structured form by a matter wave in continuous field properties of space
However if true one must also show how the probabilities associated with Schrödinger’s equation could have evolved out of that medium.
Classical mechanics tell us that because of the continuous properties of waves, the energy the article "Why is energy/mass quantized?" Oct, 4 2007 associated with a quantum system would be distributed throughout the entire "surface" a threedimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension similar to how the wave generated by a vibrating ball on a surface of a rubber diaphragm are disturbed over its entire surface while the magnitude of the displacement it causes will decrease as one moves away from the focal point of the balls oscillations.
However, this means if one extrapolates the mechanics of the rubber diaphragm to a "surface" of threedimensional space one must assume the oscillations associated with each individual quantum system must be disturbed thought the entire universe while the spatial displacement associated with its energy; defined in the in the article “Defining energy?” Nov 27, 2007 would decrease as one moves away from its focal point. Therefore their is a nonzero probability they could be found anywhere in our threedimensional environment.
Classical Wave Mechanics also tells us a resonance would most probably occur on the surface of the rubber sheet were the magnitude of the vibrations is greatest and would diminish as one move away from that point,
Similarly an observer would most probably find a quantum system were the magnitude of the vibrations in a "surface" of a threedimensional space manifold is greatest and would diminish as one move away from that point.
However this is exactly what is predicted by Quantum mechanics in that one can only define a particle’s position or momentum in terms of the probabilistic values associated with vibrations of its wave function.
In other words is it is possible to derive a scenario in which the concepts of quantum mechanics could have evolved out for the continuous field properties of an environment consisting of four dimensional spacetime or four *spatial* dimensions.
As was mentioned earlier we can never by sure if Einstein’s theories or Quantum mechanics is the primary mover and creator of our universe because no one there when it began. However the fact that one can derive the concepts of quantum mechanics using Einstein’s theories is a strong indicate that it came first.
In other words it suggests that the Quantum chicken was more than likely born out of a Relativistic egg.
It should be remember that Einstein’s genius and the symmetry of his mathematics allows us to choose whether to define the evolution of the universe in either four *spatial* dimensions or four dimensional spacetime.
Later Jeff
Copyright Jeffrey O’Callaghan 2016
Anthology of 
The Reality of the Fourth Spatial Dimension Paperback $9.77 Ebook $6.24 
The Imagineer’s


The Imagineer’s

The Imagineer’s Chronicles Vol. 4 — 2013 Paperback $13.29 Ebook $7.99 
The Imagineer’s 

The Imagineer’s

The Imagineer’s 
