Subatomic Mass Spectrum From 1st Principles
in [Physics]
|
Prev: WHAT’S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 23 Apr 10 Washington, DC
Next: galactic density & distribution; speed of light derived pure math & a log-spiral-radius #29; ATOM TOTALITY
From: BURT on 25 Apr 2010 21:42 On Apr 25, 6:32 pm, "Robert L. Oldershaw" <rlolders...(a)amherst.edu> wrote: > On Apr 25, 4:32 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > God created first space, time and mass. He is now creating gravity. > > Or is it levity? No. But he is into levatation.
From: Robert L. Oldershaw on 25 Apr 2010 22:00 On Apr 25, 3:35 pm, Matt <30d...(a)net.net> wrote: > > I didn't find graph one in the linked paper. > > In what way is the spectrum "very unique?" > > If you have made this histogram, please post it somewhere and provide > a link. ------------------------------------------- Hi Matt, The stability/mass histogram is unique because it has an unmistakable underlying pattern to it. The standard model has not been able to make progress in explaining this complex pattern. The Discrete Self- Similar Paradigm, in the past several months, has yielded a very good first approximation of this pattern. It says where the peaks should be, and where they should not be. Again, the standard model is not able to do this unless you first put in the basic pattern "by hand". Not too impressive. At this point the stability/mass histogram for 95 particles in the 100-1850 MeV range is plotted by hand and sits on my desk. I should have an excel (xcel?) version by the end of the week, and that file will eventually become available by email, or on arXiv.org, or on my website, or all of the above. The matchup between the experimental spectrum and the theoretical spectrum based on the DSSP is very nice. There is a table in the linked paper that compares experimental and theoretical mass values for a smaller set of 27 particles (but they are the most important and representative ones). If you study that table, you will get a hint of what is to come in the histogram. Thanks for your positive comments. Best, RLO www.amherst.edu/~rloldershaw
From: Mahipal7638 on 25 Apr 2010 22:17
On Apr 24, 10:13 pm, eric gisse <jowr.pi.nos...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Robert L. Oldershaw wrote: > > When you plot a histogram of particle masses from 100 MeV to 1800 MeV, > > and then adjust the peak heights to reflect the particle "widths", > > i.e., stability, you get a very unqiue spectrum that the "standard > > model" is completely unable to explain. > > You'll find that physics always has a hard time 'explaining' numerology and > general data juggling to the satisfaction of certain people. > > [...] Physics doesn't explain anything, it's Physicists that pretend/claim to do so. Know the difference? If not, email Physics for an explanation. Better, try make a call from your cell phone, if you're really in the Physicists' Clique. Enjo(y)... -- Mahipal |