Wednesday, July 20, 2011

Last minute prediction!

While updating the chapter about the p-adic model for hadronic masses (see this) I found besides some silly numerical errors also a gem that I had forgotten. For pion the contributions to mass squared from color-magnetic spin-spin interaction and color Coulombic interaction and super-symplectic gluons cancel and the mass is in excellent approximation given by the m2(π)=2m2(u) with m(u)=m(d) =0.1 GeV in good approximation. That only quarks contribute is the TGD counterpart for the almost Goldstone boson character of pion meaning that its mass is only due to the massivation of quarks. The value of p-adic prime is p≈ 2k, with k(u)=k(d)=113 and the mass of charged pion is predicted with error of .2 per cent.

If the reduction of pion mass to mere quark mass holds true for all scaled variants of ordinary hadron physics, one can deduce the value of u and d quark masses from the mass of the pion of M89 hadron physics and vice versa. The mass estimate is 145 GeV if one identifies the bump claimed by CDF (see this and this) as M89 pion. Recall that D0 did not detect the CDF bump (see this). I have discussed possible reasons for the discrepancy in an earlier posting in terms of the hypothesis that dark quarks are in question.

From this one can deduce that the p-adic prime p≈ 2k for the u and d quarks of M89 physics is k=93 using m(u,93)= 2(113-93)/2m(u,113), m(u,113)≈ .1 MeV. For top quark one has k=94 so that a very natural transition takes place to a new hadron physics. The predicted mass of π(89) is 144.8 GeV and consistent with the value claimed by CDF. What makes the prediction non-trivial is that possible quark masses comes as half-octaves meaning exponential sensitivity with respect to the p-adic length scale.

The common mass of u(89) and d(89) quarks is 102 GeV in good approximation and quark jets with mass peaked around 100 GeV could serve as a signature for them. The direct decays of the π(89) to M89 quarks are of course non-allowed kinematically.

For a summary about indications for M89 see appropriate section in the chapter New Particle Physics Predicted by TGD: Part I of "p-Adic Length Scale Hypothesis and Dark Matter Hierarchy". See also the short pdf article Is the new boson reported by CDF pion of M89 hadron physics? at my homepage.

3 Comments:

At 7:06 AM, Anonymous Joseph Nebenzahl said...

hi, im Joey, iv never studied physics per se so i have a little trouble following, but am amazed but what i can understand..Thanx...iv'e been researching the consioussness theory since age 15, although i have a slightly different methods... what do you think about the intake of psychedelic substances as self-experimentation,(LSD,Mescaline,Psilocybin etc.) in combination with spiritual meditative practices/rituals as attempting to use my inherent consioussness being to overwrite realities inborn effect through rebirthed perspective... Also, think you'd be interested to know, as a Jew iv'e been most focused on my heritage as a means of re-connecting with my inner being, with specific regard to the mystical learnings of kabbalah... and they line up almost exactly with theories of consioussness. Maybe thats all God is, consious nothingness which created all us and the combined minds of all the consious creatures alive is actually the current God, with time being non-existant except as a concept to aid us until were ready to deal with what really is an implosion+explosion of All on an instantaneous basis, our perception moves the worldline throughout the timeless matrix of consioussness, which grows inward as every consious being gains more knowledge/individualization of self, One big puzzle, every piece a puzzle on it's own....Could this not be the misunderstood gravitational pull, the nuclear (as well as sub/dark matter, and ultra/superfast light above and beyond our comprehension) power plant of consiousness naturally drawing objects inwards as per it's electromagnetic pull....sry know its not the point of the article but couldnt figure out how to contact.. Joey

 
At 8:23 PM, Anonymous matpitka@luukku.com said...

Someone has said that hallucinogens provide a completely uncontrolled and therefore very dangerous manner to study one's consciousness. Meditation provides a controlled manner and there is no danger about drowning to the ocean of consciousness.


Zero energy ontology has very close parallels with "God as consciousness nothingness". Conscious existence as endless sequence of re-creations of the Universe and God(s) as dynamical and evolving.

In western view forced by belief on classical physics God is just passive agent who fixed the initial values for field equations and forgot his creation after that. By giving up some prejudices about the relationship between experienced time and geometric time of physicist, one finds that the determinism of field equations is not inconsistent with the non-determinism of quantum jump. Western physicists have a lot to learn about eastern wisdom gained by a systematic empirical study of consciousness.


I would not equate consciousness with any physical phenomenon be it gravitation or magnetic fields or whatever. Conscious existence corresponds to a different ontological level: consciousness is in the moment of re-creation- quantum jump between two quantum worlds. Physical worlds/quantum states are zombies.

 
At 12:57 AM, Blogger Ulla said...

Great answer.

Maybe we really must redefine our reality and make it non-deterministic. The determinism is only an illusion, especially for living matter, but also in some degree for ordinary atoms and molecules. They are resonating and oscillating all the time. The song of life, or consciousness? Infinity attached in the vacuum? Is the vacuum also in our atoms? So we would have access to 'infinite' consciousness all the time.

Think of Higgs as a smeared-out wave. Is the wave better collapsed by adding more energy? No! The mexican hat symbol is wrong. Think at it. What we would need to do is making Higgs interfere by reducing the energy (= measuring)? Reduced state collapse. Braidings. This is how it works?

I discussed at Should We Trust Experts? But they don't see the point. They express exactly the opposite to what they claim?

 

Post a Comment

<< Home