The *mainstream human physics* (MH physics) is now facing some unresolved questions. A short list is as below.
a. The derivation of Standard Model particle zoo (string unification)
b. The Planck data for dark mass and dark energy
c. The cryptic relationships between the experimentally measured Standard Model constants (the theoretical base for the free parameters {the Cabibbo and Weinberg angles, Alpha, mass-charges, etc.})
d. Superunification (Quantum / gravity unification)
e. The Baryongenesis
f. The rest mass rising mechanism
g. Many others (lives, numbers, etc.)
That is, there is a great divide between this MH physics and the Nature physics. Can the MH physics at its current *standing* ground jump over this great divide? Even if SUSY (with s-particles) were true, it would still not be able to resolve all issues above. The M-string theory with many hypes cannot even reproduce the Standard Model particle zoo but invented a copout (the other-universes) for its failure.
Those are failures. Repeating failures will not make them into successes. Yet, those unresolved issues can be discussed theoretically, though the steps of human physics development.
First, collecting data --- knowing the phenomena.
Second, finding the pattern (with equations to best fit the data) --- these equations have *variables* and *parameters*.
Third, finding the underlying causes (dynamics) for the equations (especially for the variables).
Fourth, finding the underlying framework for the *parameters*, deriving parameters from an axiomatic system.
Thus, any success in the step four (4), {The cryptic relationships between the experimentally measured Standard Model constants (the theoretical base for the free parameters [the Cabibbo and Weinberg angles, Alpha, mass-charges, etc.])}, it will be an indicator for a promising pathway to get over this great divide. Yet, the evolution of the Nature physics {from axioms (deriving parameters, step 4) to phenomena (step 1)} goes opposite from the steps of human physics development. And, such an indicator is available at http://prebabel.blogspot.com/2012/04/alpha-fine-structure-constant-mystery.html . In fact, from here, the entire known human physics can be reproduced. However, instead of showing only the reproductions, I would like to show the divide which is, in fact, the place that the bridge is needed. Yet, this great divide can be discussed as four sub-divides.
The great divide one: the issue of gravity.
In the MH physics, the gravity was understood as Newtonian gravity (an instantaneous force) and as General Relativity (space-time curvature or the graviton). Today, the Newtonian gravity is abandoned as a proper gravity theory although it is still a good tool for calculating the orbits of launching rockets. The instantaneity issue is beyond the rational understanding, and the General Relativity has provided a good description for the cosmos. Thus, the instantaneousness is no longer an issue, viewed as a nonsense issue now. In an analogy of Standard Model of particle physics, the *graviton* was invented as the gravitational force carrier. Of course, there must be *gravitational wave*, being predicted by the GR. With these two great inventions (graviton and gravitational wave), MH physics has gone nowhere for the past 80 years on this issue of gravity.
In the Nature physics, the gravity force is an instantaneous force. By abandoning the instantaneity, it will of course forever block the MH physics to deal with this gravity issue. Gravity is a *LONG* distance force, significantly different from the other three forces which are *Contacting* forces, that is, asserting the force by *shaking-hands* (force carriers as the hands). Electromagnetic force has a *long-hand* (the photon) which forms the *causal universe*. Yet, the gravity can assert its force beyond the causal horizon (that is, traveling fast then light speed if it is done with a particle carrier or a wave).
Nature starts with three steps (ready, get set, go). That is, it will not invent two *sets* of law. If the fast-than-light speed is not allowed for the other three forces, how can gravity get a special privilege? Of course, not. Thus, the graviton and the gravitational wave must be nonsense. There must be a different mechanism for the instantaneity. This is done by “The Real-Ghost symmetry mechanism (http://www.prequark.org/Mphy.htm#Real ).
That is, there is a *ghost POINT* (only a topological point) as the symmetry *partner* of this material universe. Every particle of this material universe is bouncing between the two (ghost point and the material universe) with light speed. For two particles A and B, B is beyond the causal horizon of A, that is, A and B can never shaking-hands directly. But, they are still connected via the ghost point. The force between A and B is (see http://prebabel.blogspot.com/2012/04/rise-of-gravitation-and-hierarchy.html ),
F (gravity force) = K ħ / (delta T * delta S) , K the coupling constant
The intrinsic (rest) mass is, in fact, arising from this real-ghost mechanism (see http://www.prequark.org/Gravity.htm ).
Thus, Nature has two types of force,
1. the contacting type by shaking hands with force carriers, limited by light speed
2. the non-contacting type via ghost point connection and is instantaneous
The coupling strength of each force is determined by the *pie* sharing. For the contacting type, the way of sharing is about the *particle types* in the particle zoo which gives rise to the Cabibbo, Weinberg angles (see “Theoretical calculation of Cabibbo and Weinberg angles, (http://prebabel.blogspot.com/2011/10/theoretical-calculation-of-cabibbo-and.html )”) and Alpha. For the non-contacting type, the sharing is among *all* particles in the universe. With this understanding, those couplings can and were calculated (derived).
The Higgs mechanism is the reverse-engineering from the weak-process (mainly for the W and Z boson masses) which is by all means not dealing with the mass-giving in general. His idea came from the superconductor condensation phenomenon, that is, an asphalt lake-like *field*, slows down the massless particle and gives it an initial (apparent) mass. Two weeks ago, Peter Higgs received Nobel Prize in physics for this idea. He is, of course, deserve it, as many others who stood on his shoulder had received Nobel before him. Furthermore, for the past 40 years, the HEP of MP physics is driven by his idea, that is, in the human terms, Higgs deserves the Nobel 10 times more than anyone else. But, his idea is an analogy (or the shadow) of the Nature at best (see “Higgs Boson, a shadow of the Prequark field (http://prebabel.blogspot.com/2011/09/higgs-boson-not-best-idea.html )” and has nothing to do with the *gravity*.
Andrew (at http://dispatchesfromturtleisland.blogspot.com/2013/11/more-cosmic-accounting-and-some.html?showComment=1386086144012#c1902146350263304331 ) commented, “Your preon-string theory is interesting (I've explored the literature on them at some length and was an important contributor to several of the Wikipedia articles on preons) but this theory is too speculative to attract my attention unless it has testable phenomenological consequences.”
By resolving the rest mass rising mechanism (see http://www.prequark.org/Gravity.htm ), all unresolved questions above are resolved automatically, as it can *predict* or *produce* (as the direct consequences) the followings.
a. The derivation of Standard Model particle zoo (string unification), see G-strings at http://tienzengong.wordpress.com/2013/08/24/g-string-and-dark-energy/
b. The Planck data for dark mass and dark energy, see http://tienzengong.wordpress.com/2013/09/25/dark-energy-mystery-no-more/
c. The cryptic relationships between the experimentally measured Standard Model constants (the theoretical base for the free parameters {the Cabibbo and Weinberg angles, Alpha, mass-charges, etc.}), see http://prebabel.blogspot.com/2012/04/alpha-fine-structure-constant-mystery.html
d. Superunification (Quantum / gravity unification), see http://prebabel.blogspot.com/2012/04/rise-of-gravitation-and-hierarchy.html
What kind of phenomenological consequences should be demanded in addition to the above?
The great divide two: the issue of lives.
Even the above divide is bridged, there are still more divides for the MH physics. Although all lives obey the laws of physics, the rock bottom MH physics laws cannot describe the life-rising mechanism. In the past, this failure was covered up by expelling it out of the scope of physics. Recently, a new idea (Multiverse) was invented, saying that this universe which we are living in is a special variety among zillions of other-universes. That is, the physics law, in general, does not demand the rising of life, and the life arises as a happenstance, not prohibited by the zillion possible universes. We can examine this multiverse idea in three ways.
The first way, reality vs theory --- for multiverse as a reality, it has produced one special variety which gives rise to lives. Yet, for multiverse as a theory, it has failed to pinpoint a pathway of finding the nature’s way of generating this special variety *theoretically*, that is, without any physical restriction. That is, even if the multiverse ides were a good idea, the current multiverse idea is a failed theory.
The second way, there are three ways to produce different universes.
1. With different physics laws, P-multiverses
2. With different nature constants, NC-multiverses
3. With different boundary conditions
And, there are also three ways for the emerging of those different universes.
i. Emerging vertically, one after another.
ii. Emerging horizontally, zillions co-exist simultaneously.
iii. Emerging both vertically and horizontally.
For the Cycling Universes (http://www.prequark.org/Initial.htm , C-multiverse), their boundary conditions are different, and the zillion pre-big-bang universes can be described with the *Inflationary Model*. This C-multiverse needs not having different laws and different nature constants. On the other hand, the horizontal type of multiverse (H-multiverses) cannot be distinguished if they do not have different laws or different nature constants. Yet, if those H-multiverses were emerging from the same source, it has theoretical difficulty to construct a way of emerging out different laws from the different initial conditions (forming a different bubble, so to speak) while it might be reasonable for evolving out different nature constants. Thus, the nature constants of each universe should be bubble-depend. Then, if we can show that the nature constants of *this* universe is not bubble-depend, there is no reason for the nature constants of the other universes to be bubble-depend. And, these NC-multiverses should be all connected as one universe. This proof is available in the article “Multiverse bubbles are now all burst by the math of Nature”, at (http://prebabel.blogspot.com/2013/10/multiverse-bubbles-are-now-all-burst-by.html ).
The third way, showing that the physics laws of *this* universe do give rise to lives, not a happenstance. Life has three special attributes.
1. It needs a computing device (an abacus, a counting straw or a Turing computer)
2. Its members have a special feature, the *individuality*, that is, it needs *four codes (or colors)*, such as, the (A, G, T, C) of the DNA codes.
3. It species wants to be immortal. Then, it needs *seven codes (colors)*, such as, (A, G, T, C, F, M, K). F is female, M – male and K- kids.
In the G-string representation, both proton and neutron are Turing computers, see (http://www.prequark.org/Biolife.htm ). And, there are 4-colors (red, yellow, blue, white) and 7-colors (red, yellow, blue, white, G1, G2, G3) in G-strings. These (4-, 7-) colors form a Ball-Donut transformation, see (http://www.prequark.org/Gravity.htm#Bal ). For more detail of these, they are available in the article “KEY MISSION OF LIFE”, at (http://tienzengong.wordpress.com/2013/09/02/key-mission-of-life/ ).
That is, the physics laws of *this* universe carry the strong anthropic seeds. The lives in *this* universe do not arise with happenstance but is an expression of the anthropic seeds which are embedded in the physics laws (the G-strings) of *this* universe. Thus, regardless of the issue of the multiverse, there is a giant divide between the MH physics and the fact of *this* universe. More details are available in the article “Physics laws must give rise to biological lives directly”, see (http://prebabel.blogspot.com/2011/11/physics-laws-must-give-rise-to.html ).
The great divide three: the numbers.
For the past 100 years, physics is very successful while *ignoring* some other obvious *facts*, the life and the math (using it only as tools). The exclusion of these two facts from the scope of physics was necessary tactically, as the laws of physics were, thus far, seemingly unable to encompass them two. But, by excluding them in *principle* (such as using Boltzmann Brain as a possible cause for the rising of life), physicists are then fooling themselves, as this Nature consists of, at least, three parts.
a. The physical universe (not including life),
b. Lives,
c. Numbers.
Then, there are two possibilities. There are three different sets of laws for these three parts. Or, those three are governed by a set of unified laws. For the current physics paradigm, it has chosen the former. On the other hand, I have selected the later (they are unified), as I already showed that the *seeds of life* are embedded in the laws of physics when it is described with the G-string representation. Yet, with this choice, both facts (lives and numbers) must be the *checkpoints* for forming the physics theory. That is, the laws of math must be isomorphic to the laws of physics.
Different from life’s attributes (computing device, individuality, and immortality), the math universe (encompassing infinities) is seemingly intrinsically different from the *physical* universe (a finitude). Thus, the first task of this physics/math unification is about concretizing the infinities to finites. The two concretizing processes are described in detail in the article “The creation before the big bang and before the inflation (http://tienzen.livejournal.com/584.html )”. These concretizing processes give rise to *space, time and mass*.
Then, from a *new* math, the Quantum Principle was *derived*. The detail is available in the article “The emerging of Quantum Principle (http://tienzen.livejournal.com/973.html )”.
Then, we must reproduce the entire Standard Model particle zoo from math too, and this is done with the following articles, a) “Computability and the internal structure of zero (http://tienzen.blogspot.com/2012/05/computability-and-internal-structure-of.html )”, b) “The source of the “Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking, part 3 (http://prebabel.blogspot.com/2011/05/source-of-spontaneous-symmetry-breaking_11.html )”, c) “48, the exact number for the number of elementary particles (http://prebabel.blogspot.com/2012/04/48-exact-number-for-number-of.html )”.
The following articles are also available for giving more analysis on this divide.
Unification of physics and mathematics (http://www.prequark.org/Mlaw.htm ).
The Philosophical Meanings of Fermat's Last Theorem (http://www.prequark.org/Fermat.htm ).
Law of creation (http://www.prequark.org/think03.htm#A08 ):
Law of Creation -- If B is created by "creating something from nothing process," B (the something) must remain to be "nothingness" in essence.
Law of Creation, part 2 (http://www.prequark.org/Create.htm ).
The great divide four: the MH physics itself
The three divides above are created by Nature. That is, even Martians will face those same divides in their Martian physics. However, the human has created another great divide by the human’s own works and choosing, taking the wrong pathways. It will not be a big deal if both SUSY (with s-particles) and M/F-string theories are not supported by any test data while they can provide answers to the three nature-divides above. But, not only they did not, their arrogance has declared two strong anti-nature statements.
1. The nature is un-nature. Two articles, a) “Nonsense of the un-nature Nature (http://tienzengong.wordpress.com/2013/12/17/nonsense-of-the-un-nature-nature/ )” and b) “CAN NATURE BE UNNATURAL? (http://tienzengong.wordpress.com/2013/09/19/can-nature-be-unnatural/ )”, have discussed this issue in detail.
2. The Nature (this universe) is only a small part of a big whole (the multiverse), that is, the observed physics laws in this universe is not universal (according to the M/F-string theories) but is an oddball with no significance in the universal physics laws. Of course, I have shown that this is not the case, as the lives, the numbers are all isomorphic to one another with the laws of physics of *this* universe.
In fact, there are three wrong pathways in this MH physics. The first wrong pathway is SUSY (with s-particles). After many deadly blows by the recent data, the SUSY devotees are becoming *religious*. They have turned SUSY into the religious hope of SUSY parousia {see “The hope of SUSY parousia (http://prebabel.blogspot.com/2013/11/the-hope-of-susy-parousia.html )”, “NATURE’S MASTER-KEY CUTS OUT SUSY THE UNDEAD (http://tienzengong.wordpress.com/2013/09/08/natures-master-key-cuts-out-susy-the-undead/ )”. With this great religious power, they even declared that Nature is un-nature.
The second wrong pathway is built by M/F-string theories. I have shown that their hideout haven (the Multiverse) is nonsense in the anthropic physics above (“Multiverse bubbles are now all burst by the math of Nature”, at (http://prebabel.blogspot.com/2013/10/multiverse-bubbles-are-now-all-burst-by.html ) and in the argument of Newtonian methodology (Model building, paradigm, and Truth, http://prebabel.blogspot.com/2013/12/model-building-paradigm-and-truth.html ). Yet, M-theory is not all wrong and can be a TOE if it adds two points, see “M-theory, a TOE if and only if it adds two points (http://prebabel.blogspot.com/2011/11/m-theory-toe-if-and-only-if-it-adds-two.html )”.
Two more articles below discuss more issues about M/F-string theories.
M-/F-STRING THEORIES, FAILED THEORIES (http://tienzengong.wordpress.com/2013/09/25/m-f-string-theories-failed-theories/ ).
BARKED UP THE WRONG TREES, M-THEORY AND SUSY (http://tienzengong.wordpress.com/2013/09/19/barked-up-the-wrong-trees-m-theory-and-susy/ ).
Although the two wrong pathways have done some great damages on the advancement of the MH physics, they are still labeled as *Speculative*. The worst wrong pathway (which will hinder the advancement of human physics for generations to come) is the Higgs idea which is now viewed as *verified* physics.
*After* the greatest discovery of mankind, the new 126 Gev boson, it is viewed as a useless burble if it is a Higgs, and this point was expressed by many prominent physicists after that new particle was *named* Higgs.
A. In the article “What *Should* We Be Worried About? (http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=5465 ), the Higgs connotes a great crisis of physics.
B. Jester (Résonaances, http://resonaances.blogspot.com/2013/08/what-about-b-to-k-star-mu-mu.html ) showed his trademark pessimism and frustration in August 2013.
C. In the article “the crisis in modern physics, (http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=6238 ), Turok (Director of Perimeter Institute) said, "Theoretical physics is at a crossroads [after the Higgs] right now…In a sense, we’ve entered a very deep crisis.
That is, the Higgs does not and will not make any help in resolving the unresolved issues. It is useless. The only chance for the MH physics to get out of its failure-cycle is that the new boson is *NOT* the Higgs, and this might take a generation or longer to conclude that. Fortunately, this newly discovered 126 Gev particle can be accounted for by many other models, see http://www.prequark.org/Q2.htm . If we cannot find out that the new 126 Gev particle is not a Higgs very soon, the MH physics will be stuck for another long while. The Higgs analogy of an asphalt lake-like vacuum is wrong and can be replaced by the G-string vacuum, and this is discussed in detail in the article “Higgs chicken, Higgs egg and Higgs hallucination (http://prebabel.blogspot.com/2013/06/higgs-chicken-higgs-egg-and-higgs.html )”.
While those SUSY (with s-particles) and multiverse devotees are *religious* when they are talking about their babies, they uphold the Newtonian methodology for all other models, that is, observation or else. In fact, *all* observations are not correct per se, although they might not be totally wrong. Aristotle’s observations were the greatest at his time but are mostly not accurate now. It is the same for Newton. The greatest observation effort of mankind produced the Standard Model. Yet, it is the *rationale* which rules that SM is not complete. It will take a while for observations to find out that the Higgs-vacuum is only a *shadow* of the G-string space-time, but we can rule out Higgs with two rationales.
a. Higgs is useless for any issue of these three Nature divides.
b. G-string has built bridges for all those three Nature divides.
That is, by all means, Higgs is not needed as it is simply useless.
Searching and discovering the secret of Nature is the dream of all physicists. Yet, most often, they will not accept other’s answers even if they know that those are true, as they still try to find a different way to get those same answers in their own way. But, for these three great Nature divides, they sit here silently, blocking all detour attempts, cannot go over, go under and cannot go around it.
Furthermore, these are indeed the great divides in the literal sense, that is, I know all too well that this article will not move those SUSY and Multiverse devotees one bit. I simply just *MARK* my words here as the witness for the future of mankind.
Note (added on August 29, 2016):
The current (2016) mainstream physics status is this: #PostCheckmateTTF (Post Checkmate temper tantrum fit).
See https://tienzengong.wordpress.com/2016/08/26/vision-eulogy-the-post-checkmate-temper-tantrum-fit/
Copyright © December 2013 by Tienzen (Jeh-Tween) Gong
No comments:
Post a Comment