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 space-time dimension.

However Einstein gave us the ability resolve this conflict when defined his space-time 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 space-time 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 space-time 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 three-dimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension similar to how Einstein derived gravity in terms of a physical displacement in a space-time manifold.

However, we as three-dimensional 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 three-dimensions 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 three-dimensional 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 three-dimensional 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 three-dimensional 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 three-dimensional 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 three-dimensional 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 non-quantized 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 three-dimensional 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 three-dimensional 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 space-time 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 Einsteinâ€™s genius and the fact that he defined the geometry of space-time in terms of the constant velocity of light allows us to choose to define our universe in either a space-time 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