Prev: JSH: Morphic non-linear Factoring Random solved
Next: sci.physics.foundations rejected this.
From: Al.Rivero on 17 May 2010 15:11
On 17 mayo, 18:16, "Robert L. Oldershaw" <rlolders...(a)amherst.edu>
wrote:
> On May 17, 4:07 am, "Al.Riv...(a)gmail.com" <al.riv...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> Please give me a list of the MASSES of the most stable D and B
> particles that you wish to understand, and I will see if my formalism
> is able to say something about how to explain those masses.

Step by step guide:

1) download http://pdg.lbl.gov/2009/mcdata/mass_width_2008.csv
2) open it with excel or openoffice. I choose OpenOffice 3.2. This is
tricky for Spanish users, one must change '.' by ',' in the float
numbers.
3) Select all the cells whose width is greater than 0 and smaller than
1E-007
4) Select the columns Mass, Width, J, Chrg and Name, or delete the
other columns
5) Cut the result, paste elsewhere:

1,06E+002 3,02E-016 1/2 - mu
1,78E+003 2,28E-009 1/2 - tau
1,40E+002 2,55E-014 0 + pi
4,94E+002 5,35E-014 0 + K
4,98E+002 7,40E-012 0 0 K0S
4,98E+002 1,30E-014 0 0 K0L
1,87E+003 6,37E-010 0 + D
1,86E+003 1,62E-009 0 0 D
1,97E+003 1,33E-009 0 + D(s)
5,28E+003 4,05E-010 0 + B
5,28E+003 4,33E-010 0 0 B
5,37E+003 4,65E-010 0 0 B(s)
6,28E+003 1,43E-009 0 + B(c)
9,40E+002 7,48E-025 1/2 0 n(P11)
1,12E+003 2,52E-012 1/2 0 Lambda(P01)
1,19E+003 8,26E-012 1/2 + Sigma(P11)
1,20E+003 4,48E-012 1/2 - Sigma(P11)
1,31E+003 2,28E-012 1/2 0 Xi(P11)
1,32E+003 4,04E-012 1/2 - Xi(P11)
1,67E+003 8,07E-012 3/2 - Omega
2,29E+003 3,32E-009 1/2 + Lambda(c)
2,47E+003 1,50E-009 1/2 + Xi(c)
2,47E+003 5,90E-009 1/2 0 Xi(c)
2,70E+003 9,60E-009 1/2 0 Omega(c)
3,52E+003 2,01E-008 ? ++ Xi(cc)
3,52E+003 2,01E-008 ? + Xi(cc)
5,62E+003 4,79E-010 1/2 0 Lambda(b)
5,79E+003 1,42E-012 1/2 - Xi(b)
5,79E+003 4,70E-010 1/2 0 Xi(b)



> PS: You should see the refined graph based on M = ([sqrt j{j+1}/a])
> (674.8 MeV)!  It is extraordinary.  Send me an email, and I will
> attach a pdf.

Really I would prefer public communication. You can upload the pdf in
a lot of places in the web (in the cloud, ha!), and provide a pointer

> Best,
> RLOwww.amherst.edu/~rloldershaw

From: leucipo2001 on 17 May 2010 15:21
On 17 mayo, 21:11, "Al.Riv...(a)gmail.com" <al.riv...(a)gmail.com> wrote:

>
> 1,06E+002       3,02E-016       1/2        -    mu
> 1,78E+003       2,28E-009       1/2        -    tau
> 1,40E+002       2,55E-014       0          +    pi
> 4,94E+002       5,35E-014       0          +    K
> 4,98E+002       7,40E-012       0          0    K0S
> 4,98E+002       1,30E-014       0          0    K0L
> 1,87E+003       6,37E-010       0          +    D
> 1,86E+003       1,62E-009       0          0    D
> 1,97E+003       1,33E-009       0          +    D(s)
> 5,28E+003       4,05E-010       0          +    B
> 5,28E+003       4,33E-010       0          0    B
> 5,37E+003       4,65E-010       0          0    B(s)
> 6,28E+003       1,43E-009       0          +    B(c)
> 9,40E+002       7,48E-025       1/2        0    n(P11)
> 1,12E+003       2,52E-012       1/2        0    Lambda(P01)
> 1,19E+003       8,26E-012       1/2        +    Sigma(P11)
> 1,20E+003       4,48E-012       1/2        -    Sigma(P11)
> 1,31E+003       2,28E-012       1/2        0    Xi(P11)
> 1,32E+003       4,04E-012       1/2        -    Xi(P11)
> 1,67E+003       8,07E-012       3/2        -    Omega
> 2,29E+003       3,32E-009       1/2        +    Lambda(c)
> 2,47E+003       1,50E-009       1/2        +    Xi(c)
> 2,47E+003       5,90E-009       1/2        0    Xi(c)
> 2,70E+003       9,60E-009       1/2        0    Omega(c)
> 3,52E+003       2,01E-008       ?         ++    Xi(cc)
> 3,52E+003       2,01E-008       ?          +    Xi(cc)
> 5,62E+003       4,79E-010       1/2        0    Lambda(b)
> 5,79E+003       1,42E-012       1/2        -    Xi(b)
> 5,79E+003       4,70E-010       1/2        0    Xi(b)

I forgot the header: First colum is Mass, second is Width, then spin,
then charge, then name.
Bot mass and width are in MeV

A clarification: the barrier < 1E-007 is not arbitrary, I am asking to
be more stable than the neutral pion. A better bound is to notice that
the charged pion goes beta, and that beta decay is via the Fermi
constant, and then by dimensional analisis it can be seen that the
decay width scales as a 5h power of the mass. So you can filter the
more stable particles by looking at width/mass^5, and selecting all
the particles having a value of this filter smaller than the one of
the charged pion. The final table is the same.


> > PS: You should see the refined graph based on M = ([sqrt j{j+1}/a])
> > (674.8 MeV)!  It is extraordinary.  Send me an email, and I will
> > attach a pdf.
>
> Really I would prefer public communication. You can upload the pdf in
> a lot of places in the web (in the cloud, ha!), and provide a pointer
>

Another clarification, or more accurately a disclaimer. If I receive
some file or email from you, I will dump it to ascii with some
automatic tool, and republish it in the web, without any guarantee on
fidelity. So it is better for you to keep public from the start.
From: Robert L. Oldershaw on 17 May 2010 23:16
On May 17, 3:21 pm, leucipo2001 <al.riv...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Another clarification, or more accurately a disclaimer. If I receive
> some file or email from you, I will dump it to ascii with some
> automatic tool, and republish it in the web, without any guarantee on
> fidelity. So it is better for you to keep public from the start.- --------------------------------------------

Graph coming your way tonight.

Do whatever you want with it.

The correct final graph will be put on my website and published in a
journal when I have completed my research on this matter.

RLO
www.amherst.edu/~rloldershaw
From: Robert L. Oldershaw on 18 May 2010 12:38
On May 17, 3:21 pm, leucipo2001 <al.riv...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > 1,87E+003       6,37E-010       0          +    D
> > 1,86E+003       1,62E-009       0          0    D
> > 1,97E+003       1,33E-009       0          +    D(s)
> > 5,28E+003       4,05E-010       0          +    B
> > 5,28E+003       4,33E-010       0          0    B
> > 5,37E+003       4,65E-010       0          0    B(s)
> > 6,28E+003       1,43E-009       0          +    B(c)
-----------------------------------------------------------

Using the basic M = (Sqrt n)(674,.8 MeV)formulation,

D particles are in the n = 8 range [~97 to 98% agreement]

B{+/-} correspond to n = 61 [99%]

B(s) corresponds to n = 63 [99%]

B(c) corresponds to n = 87 [99.8%]

(1) The refined M = (Sqrt [j{j+1}/a])(674.8 MeV) formulation would
undoubtedly do much better.

(2) You are probably more interested in the more detailed properties
and behavior of these particles. Me too, but I need a K-N analysis to
proceed and that is still in the future.

(2) MOST IMPORTANTLY, the low-mass end of the particle mass spectrum
is where the major action is in understanding particle masses. If one
cannot predict the 100-1800 MeV mass spectrum at 98-99%, then one is
nowhere.

RLO
www.amherst.edu/~rloldershaw
From: Al.Rivero on 18 May 2010 13:45
On 18 mayo, 18:38, "Robert L. Oldershaw" <rlolders...(a)amherst.edu>
wrote:

>
> D particles are in the n = 8 range [~97 to 98% agreement]
>
> B{+/-} correspond to n = 61 [99%]
>
> B(s) corresponds to n = 63 [99%]
>
> B(c) corresponds to n = 87 [99.8%]

See my question now? I wonder what is the rule to forbid ranges
(9..60) and (87....)
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Prev: JSH: Morphic non-linear Factoring Random solved
Next: sci.physics.foundations rejected this.