Saturday, April 28, 2012

Axiomatic physics, the final physics

In my previous article “LHC and the knowledge-based physics” ( ), I have discussed the difference between the Nature physics and the Human physics. Human physics is the human efforts of discovering the Nature physics with an epistemology of “theory building and verification tests”.  Yet, the Nature physics built the universe without any “trial and errors” of theory building steps.  That is, the Nature physics consists of only two principles.

One, the Naturalness principle (NP) --- the current universe is evolved via an “axiom system to life-system” evolution process which follows the rules of axiom and Godel systems.
Note: this axiom-system to life-system evolution process is discussed in detail in the book “Linguistics Manifesto” (ISBN 978-3-8383-9722-1, US copyright TX 7-290-840).

             Corollary of NP   --- there is no “fine tuning” (any type of adjustment by trial and errors procedure) in the rules of axiom and Godel systems. All axiomatic sentences are derived axiomatically.

Two, the Interlocking principle (IP) --- all parameters in the axiom of the Nature physics are interlocked.

           Corollary of (IP) --- all parameters of IP are “recursively” defined, such as, all Nature constants [Alpha, e (electric charge), c (light speed) and h-bar (Planck constant)], Nature dimensions (space, time and mass) and Nature parameters (energy, spin, etc.).

In fact, the Naturalness principle is the consequence of this IP. That is, the NP and the IP are the two sides of the same coin.

With the two principles above, the Nature physics has the following attributes.
1. All parameters (such as space, time, mass, etc.) are axiomatically defined in the Nature physics while most of them are operationally defined in Human physics.

2. There are no free parameters in the Nature physics. The value of any parameter (such as, the Cabibbo and Weinberg angles, the Alpha, etc.) must be calculated out axiomatically.

3. All parameters in the axiom are exactly fine fitted, that is, no fine-tuning is allowed.

The above requirements go way beyond the reach of the current physics epistemology. However, if we can discover the “seed axiom” of this Nature physics, then we can duplicate the entire Nature physics by writing out it axiomatically. That is, anything outside of the axiom-system will not be allowed to be added to the system. And, the validity and the value of this human developed Axiom-physics (AP) can be easily verified with the “finger-print” checking, comparing the axiomatic sentences of the AP with the known laws of the Nature physics which is discovered by the traditional Human physics.  If AP can derive all known laws of Nature physics, its validity will be certain. Of course, this AP (as it must be identical to the Nature physics) must answer all open questions of Human physics, such as,
a. dark matter and dark energy,
b. acceleration of the expanding universe,
c. origin of mass, the mass-rising mechanism,
d. origin of space and time,
e. origin of flavors,
f. origin of generations,
g. super unification of all forces, the coupling constants hierarchy issue,
h. how do free parameters get their values,
i. baryongenesis,
j. etc.

If all the questions above can be answered by the same physics, the validity of that physics (the AP) can be judged intuitively. Yet, what is the “seed axiom”? I have chosen the Alpha as the seed axiom.

Alpha = e^2/c * h-bar   (Axiom One)

A. Then, first, I have defined “time” axiomatically (see the article “Origin of time, the breaking of a perfect symmetry”, at ).
   i. time is a quanta, that is delta t > 0, and delta t = 0 is not defined.
   ii. time creates two copies of the universe, one with the real-time, the others with the imaginational time.

This is an axiomatic definition, without any concern of operational issues, the measurement or the experimental tests. The usefulness (or the validity) of this definition will be determined with the end-product; the expressed Axiomatic physics system, whether it matches the known knowledge of Nature physics.  However, this definition does describe a “supersymmetry” while it is, of course, different from all SUSY theories.

B. Second, I have defined “space” as follow (also see the article “Origin of spatial dimensions, and the definition for dimension” at ).

Delta s = (N) c * delta t, N is a trait matrix, c the light speed, t the time.

Again, this is an axiomatic definition, without any concern of operational issues. However, it is based on Georg Cantor’s theorem of dimensions. N (the trait matrix) will give rise to
    i. 64 dimensions (48 particles and 16 vacuum states), and these 64 dimensions will eventually be reduced to 11 physics dimensions.
    ii. some ruling and controlling angles (the innate angle and some mixing angles).

These attributes will be discussed in detail in the future posts.

C. Third, I have defined “mass” as follows (also see the article “Origin of mass, gateway to the final physics” at ).

i. m (mass) = (h-bar/c)(2pi/L),
   L is the wavelength (lambda) of a particle. As the L (lambda) is an attribute of a particle, m (mass) is also an attribute (not a universal constant) of a particle.

ii. M (mass) = (Ms * Mt) ^ (1/2) = (h-bar/c) (1/[c* delta s * delta t]) ^ (1/2)
    a. Ms (space-defined mass) = (h-bar/c) * (1/delta s), c (light speed), s (space)
    b. Mt (time-defined mass) = (h-bar/c) * (1/[c * delta t]), t (time)

As all those parameters above are recursively defined, they can be defined in many ways, by different parameters. Thus, “mass” was defined two ways above. By reviewing its definitions by all different parameters, its “meaning” will be expressed wholly. By following each definition, a set of physics will be known. Now, I will define a new parameter S, the spin. As it is defined axiomatically, it is essentially having nothing to do with the spin in the known physics. If their meanings are identical, it is just a good happy coincidence.

S (spin of a charge, mass or electric charge) = (1/2) h-bar

With this new parameter,

i. e (electric charge) = [(1/2) h-bar * c]^(1/2) = (S * c)^(1/2), this is a universal constant.

ii. m (mass charge) =  (h-bar/c) (1/[c* delta s * delta t])^(1/2)
                             = (2S/c) (1/[c* delta s * delta t]) ^ (1/2), the value of m is a function of (delta s and delta t).

In this AP (Axiomatic Physics), this S (spin) defines two copies of the universe (a supersymmetry which is also defined by the AP “time”, see the article “The Real-Ghost (RG) symmetry” at ). And, this RG symmetry is the mass-rising mechanism. The Higgs mechanism is, in fact, a shadow of this RG mechanism. This RG mechanism will give rise to gravitation and will unify all forces, and I will show this in the future posts.

Now, an easy prediction can be made by this AP. As “mass” is defined by S (spin), the Higgs boson must be massless (as it has S = 0) or must be a composite. That is, the current hint of the 125 Gev. will not be an SM Higgs.

No comments:

Post a Comment