Prev: THE QUEST FOR THE ULTIMATE THEORY OF TIME, AN INTRODUCTION TOIRREVERSIBILITY
Next: Einstein and Detecting motion
From: Robert L. Oldershaw on 21 May 2010 14:30
Speaking of equations.

I found a bone-head math error in my effort to explain the particle
mass spectrum.

The correct new mass formula is:

M = ([j{j+1}/a^2]^1/4)(674.8 MeV)

For the proton: j = 1/2, a = 4/9, M = 942 MeV [99.6%]

For eta(958): j = 1/2, a = 3/7, M = 959 MeV [99.8%]

For K particles: j = 1/2, a = 11/7, M = 501 MeV [99%]

So things are still evolving, but the specificity and significance are
getting much better.

I hope no one will object to this line of scientific inquiry.

Would not any physicist be happy to see a really new idea bloom and
flourish?

I certainly hope so.

Cheers,
RLO
www.amherst.edu/~rloldershaw
From: Robert L. Oldershaw on 22 May 2010 01:28
On May 21, 6:17 pm, eric gisse <jowr.pi.nos...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > M = ([j{j+1}/a^2]^1/4)(674.8 MeV)
>
> > For the proton: j = 1/2, a = 4/9, M = 942 MeV [99.6%]
>
> Proton mass is 938.272013(23) MeV. Wrong by ~162,000 standard deviations.
---------------------------------

Are you confusing significant digits with standard deviations?

Or are you trying to row with one oar?

It looks like the discrete mass formula will be able to retrodict all
the major and minor stability peaks of the particle mass spectrum (100
- 1800 MeV)at the <99.5%> level (or an average relative error of
0.5%).

The Substandard Model cannot do that even with the determined model-
building (read: fudging) of generations of benighted boffins.

Sweet!

RLO
www.amherst.edu/~rloldershaw
From: Robert L. Oldershaw on 22 May 2010 13:40
On May 22, 7:09 am, Hayek <haye...(a)nospam.xs4all.nl> wrote:

Lambda (1115.7 MeV) j = 3/2 a = 5/7 M = 1111.08 MeV [99.6%]

Sweet!
From: eric gisse on 22 May 2010 07:40
Robert L. Oldershaw wrote:

> On May 21, 6:17 pm, eric gisse <jowr.pi.nos...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > M = ([j{j+1}/a^2]^1/4)(674.8 MeV)
>>
>> > For the proton: j = 1/2, a = 4/9, M = 942 MeV [99.6%]
>>
>> Proton mass is 938.272013(23) MeV. Wrong by ~162,000 standard deviations.
> ---------------------------------
>
> Are you confusing significant digits with standard deviations?

The error bar for the proton is +/- 0.000023. You are off by ~162,000
standard deviations. If either of those sentences confuses you...

>
> Or are you trying to row with one oar?
>
> It looks like the discrete mass formula will be able to retrodict all
> the major and minor stability peaks of the particle mass spectrum (100
> - 1800 MeV)at the <99.5%> level (or an average relative error of
> 0.5%).
>
> The Substandard Model cannot do that even with the determined model-
> building (read: fudging) of generations of benighted boffins.

Since your formula and its' inputs has no physical basis it has no merit.

>
> Sweet!
>
> RLO
> www.amherst.edu/~rloldershaw

From: Robert L. Oldershaw on 22 May 2010 23:40
On May 22, 7:40 am, eric gisse <jowr.pi.nos...(a)gmail.com> wrote:

> "two oars"? I don't even have one!
-------------------------------------

Hey Alejandro! M = (j{j+1}/a^2)^1/4 (674.8 MeV)

Lambda j = 3/2 a = 5/7 99.0%

Sigma j = 3/2 a = 5/8 99.6%

Xi(1320) j = 3/2 a = 1/2 99.2%

Xi(1535) j = 3/2 a = 3/8 99.97%

Omega(-) j = 4/2 a = 2/5 99.85%

tau j = 1/2 a = 1/8 99.96% !!!

10 of 10 mass/stability peaks retrodicted SPOT-ON!

Average relative agreement is 99.6%
-------------------------------

Want to see something freaky?

muon j = 1/1836 a = 1 97.5% Is that weird, or what!

HOUSTON: WE HAVE A NEW AND MUCH IMPROVED PLANCK SCALE! NOT TO MENTION
A FURTHER GENERALIZATION OF GENERAL COVARIANCE AND NEW SCALING FOR
GRAVITATION.

SWEET and SWEET,
RLO
www.amherst.edu/~rloldershaw
 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: THE QUEST FOR THE ULTIMATE THEORY OF TIME, AN INTRODUCTION TOIRREVERSIBILITY
Next: Einstein and Detecting motion