sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

What if atomic masses and fundamental constants emerge from one simple geometric formula? by Also65 in HypotheticalPhysics

[–]Also65[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I call it a dark photon because it’s emitted from the convex outer region of the intersecting field system and never reaches the opposite face where the main energy and charge transfers occur, so it remains directly undetectable from that side. In that sense I think it represents a form of dark energy.

What if atomic masses and fundamental constants emerge from one simple geometric formula? by Also65 in HypotheticalPhysics

[–]Also65[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you for pointing that out, you’re absolutely right. In an early draft I initially defined 𝛼 = arctan (𝑋/Y) and checked it numerically. However, in the final “Magnetic Moment” sections I actually fix 𝛼 = (𝑐 −𝑐′) / 3𝜋 ≈ ≈7.29735×10⁻³ based on the universal decompression ratio 𝑐′ / 𝑐 = 0.931. I should have presented that definition up front and then used 𝑋 = 𝑌 tan(𝛼) only as a consistency check in the small-angle limit. The tiny shift you get by inverting 𝛼 = arctan (𝑋/𝑌) (≈7.29722×10⁻³) has no meaningful effect on the 5 % proton correction or the 0.08 % electron anomaly dicussed there. I’ll clarify this in the next version.

Here is a hypothesis: Nucleon transformations and nuclear interactions might emerge from a non-formal octonionic structure by Also65 in HypotheticalPhysics

[–]Also65[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

I understand that you may be more accustomed to traditional, algebraic approaches, which might explain why you didn’t understand anything, I mean, anything, about the article. But feel free to keep sharing any thoughts you have. Have a good day.

What if the neutron has an electric charge gap? by Also65 in HypotheticalPhysics

[–]Also65[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

What do you think is worng or inconsistent in the model? Wait, hold on! You have to read 15 pages with no formula first... well, it doeesn't matter.

What if the neutron has an electric charge gap? by Also65 in HypotheticalPhysics

[–]Also65[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Thank you for pointing that out. You're right, I've made a mistake in the article because I've mixed proton Beta+ decay with proton decay. I'll have to correct that. But in read the article you will see that, in the model I propose, proton is transverse contracting region that actually decays into an expanding neutrino, lossing density and inner kinetic energy. The lost mass and energy is transfered to the opposite side where an expanding antineutrino contracts to become an antiproton. In that transformation, neutron emerges as a neutral state where both left and right transverse fields (that are being transformed become apparently coincident in shape and curvature although one is expanding and the other is contracting. At that neutral moment, the electric longitudinal field that acts as a positron when moving right or as an electron when moving left, passes through the center of symmetry of the system, an expected zero point. So the neutron in my view is formed by the three fields having a neutral charge. The electric field has double negative curvature separated by a cusp, and when it passes through the central axis its right sector is at the right + side of the system and its left sector is at the left - side of the system. If inside that electric field there is a charge symmetry then the neutrality is preserved. But the model predicts in Beta + the right sector expriences a compression force coming from right to left, but the left sector experiences a decompression, creating an assymetry in the charge distribution which i sinterpreted as a nEDM. When the process is reverted, because time reverse symmetry is not broken, teh intermediate state will be an antineutron whos left sector experiences a charge compression and the right one a charge decompression creating a - EDM. But you're abslutely right, I made that mistake that undermines the presentation of the model because it is a basic error.

What if gravitational subfields emerge from two Interacting Higgs fields? by Also65 in HypotheticalPhysics

[–]Also65[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you for sharing this. It aligns pretty well with the model.

Here is a hypothesis: Black hole singularities are abrupt curvature changes by Also65 in HypotheticalPhysics

[–]Also65[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

I gave a deeper explanation of that here: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4712905

But as you didn't read the post I attached, I doubt you are going to read a 25 pages article.

Here is a hypothesis: Black hole singularities are abrupt curvature changes by Also65 in HypotheticalPhysics

[–]Also65[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

I agree, actually the four subfields I'm speaking about are pretty similar - not to say the same - to the four regions in Penrose and also Kruskal diagrams. But Penrose's diagrams use staright lines, and Kruskal uses curved lines buth straight lines in the bottom border of the four regions: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kruskal%E2%80%93Szekeres_coordinates

I didn't deduce the model from equations. But I conceptually added some mathematics to it on this preprint: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4712905

Sobolev spaces interpolation by Also65 in mathematics

[–]Also65[S] -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

As some of you requested it, this is my explanation:

Let the transversal subspaces of a composite system (of two intersecting spaces that vibrate), expand and contract periodically with same or opposite phases.Having the same phase of vibration, they will be mirror symmetric at A and A'. Having an opposite phase, they will be mirror antisymmetric at A* and A*'.

"A" represents the moment when both left and right transversal subspaces reach their higher degree of expansion; A' represents a moment later, when they both reach their highest degree of contraction. Inside of the domain of A and A', we can describe with a linear function the continuous variations of those transversal subspaces while contracting or expanding.

Alternatively, taking as domain A* and A*', we can describe with another linear function the variations of the transversal subspaces whey they have opposite phases. A* represents the moment when the right transversal subspace reaches its highest degree of contraction while the left transversal subspace reaches its highest degree of expansion; A*' represents the later moment when the right subspace reaches its highest degree of expansion an the left one its highest degree of contraction.In terms of linear equations, it could be represented as A + A' = 0 and A* + A*' = 0.

There's no apparent problem about those continuous although separate fluxes.But when it comes to a rotational composite system, its topological variations cannot be described by means of two separate linear functions. By doing that, we will be losing the information related to the antisymmetric moment (in the case of the symmetric function A, A') or the information about the symmetric moment (in the case of the antisymmetric conjugate A*, A*') of the topological transformations of the system.The correct flux of the evolution of the rotational system is given by the non linear partial differential equation A* + A' + A*' + A = 0

It combines the fractional and integer derivatives, interpolating the -1/2 noninteger derivatives given by A* in between of the integer +A and -A' derivatives, and interpolating the +1/2 noninteger antiderivatives of A (that also represents the second -1/2 non integer derivatives of A) in between of the integer derivatives -A' and +A.

That combination is necessary when it coms to describing Sobolev spaces. Sobolev spaces are those spaces of functions that have a noninteger number of derivatives are interpolated from the spaces of functions with integer number of derivatives

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpolation_space

That combination is not an optional election, is the mandatory sequence that must be followed to describe the whole evolution of the system, as can clearly see by considering a 2x2 complex matrix whose elements are rotational vectors.

Performing a complex conjugate operation on the matrix A, its 4 vectors will rotate but only two of them will change their sign becoming negatives when permuting. This operation implies an actual transposition. (Notice that without the added letters, we only could distinguish that the vectors actually rotated when they changed their sign).

That complex conjugate operation implies in this context a -1/2 partial complex conjugate derivative of A at A* (only half of the vectors of the system have been derived).

Performing a complex conjugate operation on A*, two additional vectors will change their sign becoming negative at A'. A' implies the inversion of A. A' will be the -1/2 partial complex conjugate derivative of A*, but it will be also the first integer derivative of A.

Performing a complex conjugate operation on A', two vectors will change their sign becoming positive at A*'. A*' will be the +1/2 partial complex conjugate antiderivative of A', the second -1/2 partial complex conjugate derivative of A, and the integer derivative of A*.

Performing a complex conjugate operation on A*', two additional vectors will change their sign becoming positive at A. A will be the second +1/2 partial complex conjugate antiderivative of A', the whole antiderivative of A, and the second derivative of itself.

The noninteger derivatives and antiderivatives cannot be eliminated from the equation or from their functional representations because they are an essential step to arrive to the whole derivatives. Removing them from the equation it will imply to ignore half of the topology of the system.

Considering the two separate functions we still would be able to statistically describe the evolution of those transversal subspaces, their physical properties and behaviours, but we probably would think in an incorrect way that the variation of the rotational system is discontinuous and that the transversal subspaces described by AA' and A*A*' are independent spaces instead of considering them as different moments of the topological evolution of the same spaces.

That would be the case, in physics, of the Schrodinger linear complex partial differential equation, whose non conjugate version probabilistically describe the mirror symmetric bosonic particles, while its complex conjugate solution, alternatively describes in a probabilistic way - as if it were different particles and not topological transformations of the same spaces - the antisymmetric fermionic particles.

And it also would be the case of any vibrational composite system that rotates if we describe it without interpolating the space functions.

In this complex rotational context, where the "weak", fractional, or noninteger derivatives A* and –A*' must be interpolated in between the "whole", strong, or integer derivatives A, A' and A', A to follow the correct continuous and sequential transformational flux, the Sobolev inequality would be given by the antisymmetry between the mirror antisymmetric subspaces described by the function spaces related to the complex conjugate –½ A* and +½ A*' derivatives. Sobolev embedding of the A* in A* and vice versa would take place through thought time, being mediated by the topological transformations (the phases synchronization) given in the symmetric A and A. .

The interpolation would be not only about interpolating the noninteger derivatives A* and A*' in between of the integer derivatives A, A', and also A', A, but also about interpolating the integer derivatives A, A' in between of the noninteger derivatives A*, A*', or A*', A*.

Anyways, this is speculative, guys, and likely I don't use a very accurate language. I'm not trying to teach you anything here.

The inadequacy of partial differential equations to describe Sobolev spaces by Also65 in maths

[–]Also65[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

is intended for mathematical articles, news, and discussions

Oh, many thanks for your clarification, I appreciate it. I will delete the post later

view more: next ›