Thank you very much, dear Hansen, I will watch the results indicated.

Do not worry, I do not quite understand many things

Regards

Angel,

All of your so-called knowledge of physics is abstract guesswork. Sure, your perfect abstract invisible bosons according to Bose-Einstein perfect abstract statistics are indistinguishable and can occupy the same perfect abstract quantum state, but each real snowflake, each concoction of real DNA, and each real fingerprint is unique and only occurs once and can only occupy the real place it is located in once. There are no statistics needed for reality.

As I thoughtfully pointed out in my essay BITTERS, Einstein's guess that perfect abstract energy was perfectly equal to perfect abstract mass times perfect constant speed of perfect abstract light perfectly squared was utter real nonsense. Real energy consists of integrated differing unique amounts of real light, real heat, and real material motion.

Excuse me, sir, but my great ignorance, I can tell you that commits serious mistakes resulting from their ignorance of quantum mechanics: First, "your perfect abstract unseen bosons"

Not my bosons, are bosons that exist and are observable: photons of light, for example, with which you can see, through the interaction of the cells of the retina of the eye, with these bosons that you call abstract.

Second error: existing and observable reality of bodies of matter, composed of a large number of quantum particles, it becomes a non-interlaced macrostate, which depends on a critical value, as a factor of the Planck mass.

Third mistake: what you call real is the result of the actual existence of quantum microstates, which interact. Any physicist knows this first-year university.

I see you have not answered my question, on the possible demonstration of the Riemann hypothesis, by quantum physics, and specifically in relation to the electric charge.

I'll give the last track, this way, to prove the Riemann hypothesis, by quantum mechanics.

For the rest: greetings

[math]\pm e/\sqrt{m_{0}^{2}\cdot G_{N}\cdot n}=1

[/math]

[math]{\displaystyle \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}}\pm e/\sqrt{m_{0}^{2}\cdot G_{N}\cdot n}={\displaystyle \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}}\frac{1}{n^{1/2}}

[/math]

Renormalization: The vacuum is neutral, the electric charge.

And this can only happen, if all non-trivial zeros, the Riemann zeta function; are values ​​of (1/2+it). t = real number

Fulfilled, moreover, that:

[math]{\displaystyle \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}}\pm e/\sqrt{m_{0}^{2}\cdot G_{N}\cdot n}={\displaystyle \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}}\frac{1}{n^{(1/2+it)}}=0

[/math]

Be, all the imaginary parts of (1/2 + it), that satisfies:

[math]

\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{1}{n^{s}}=0\:;\: s=\frac{1}{2}+it[/math]

[math]\frac{m(VH)}{m_{e}}(1+{\displaystyle \sum_{q}}\sqrt{q^{2}})=O{\displaystyle [\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\exp(-Im(s))]^{-1}}[/math]

Where, m(VH) is the value, in mass, the Higgs vacuum, and ,me, is the mass of the electron

And, electric chargues:

[math]{\displaystyle \sum_{q}}\sqrt{q^{2}}=\sqrt{(4/3)^{2}+(2/3)^{2}+(-1/3)^{2}+(1/3)^{2}+1^{2}}=\sqrt{31/9}[/math]

Regards

Angel,

Nobody has ever seen a boson because bosons are abstractions and invisible. Everybody with eyes has the ability to see light. How many photons are there in the light emitted from a glow worm's backside? I mean are there a specific number of perfect photons per square millimeter in every light no matter what the source of the light is, or its unique intensity? How are perfect photons arranged? Are they lined up, side by side, an equal distance apart? Or are they stacked neatly one above the other? What shape is a typical photon? Is it a perfect circle Angel? Or is a photon a perfect sphere? It cannot be a perfect cube right?

One last question Angel, Einstein was reputed to be the greatest squiggler of all time. His guesswork squiggles supposedly explained how the abstract Universe behaved. How would you rate your squiggles? Are they superior to Einstein's? Or are they about the same? I do hope you are not going to honestly admit that your squiggles are inferior to the ones produced by Einstein.

It is not I that needs any useless lessons in unrealistic, unnatural abstract physics. No lessons are needed for my understanding of reality. No experiments are needed. And mercifully, no squiggles are ever required to be produced by me.

You contradicts himself: "Nobody has ever seen a boson because bosons are abstractions and invisible. Everybody with eyes has the ability to SEE light. How many photons are there in the light emitted from a glow worm's backside?

Ergo, you have seen the bosons.

Look, sir: As one of the largest Einstein scientists of all time, to try to compare me with Einstein myself, would be an unforgivable act of vanity. I am who I am, and point. And finally this exchange of ideas, I leave my last scribble for you.

[math]\frac{\sqrt{(m_{pk}\cdot\exp-[\ln(m_{pk}/m_{e})/{\displaystyle 2\sqrt{{\displaystyle \sum_{q}q^{2}}}])^{2}\cdot G_{N}}}}{(1\frac{1}{\pi\sqrt{240-\ln^{2}[m(VH)/m_{e}]}})}=\pm e=1.602176565\cdot10^{-19}C[/math]

Regards

  • [deleted]

How can the scientific method's testability rule be satisfied? ... if a particle has 2 states, but one is unobservable, how do we know it has real existence?

    Not know if you have read my essay. In the essay, I show, that must exist four solutions for positive total energy. And these solutions all involve energy and momentum components, imaginary. The existence of these unobservable states, virtual, giving the minimum value of Heisenberg uncertainty.

    Similarly, this implies the wave-particle duality. This dual state, while not measured, explains the double path followed by an electron, for example, in the experiment of the slit.

    [math]E^{2}=m^{2}c^{4}+p^{2}c^{2}= (imc^{2}+pc)(-imc^{2}+pc)=E_{1}^{2}

    [/math]

    [math]E^{2}=m^{2}c^{4}+p^{2}c^{2}= (imc^{2}-pc)(-imc^{2}-pc)=E_{2}^{2}

    [/math]

    [math]E^{2}=m^{2}c^{4}+p^{2}c^{2}= (mc^{2}+ipc)(mc^{2}-ipc)=E_{3}^{2}

    [/math]

    [math]E^{2}=m^{2}c^{4}+p^{2}c^{2}= (-mc^{2}+ipc)(-mc^{2}-ipc)=E_{4}^{2}

    [/math]

    [math]E_{T}=\sqrt{E_{1}^{2}+E_{2}^{2}+E_{3}^{2}+E_{4}^{2}}=2E

    [/math]

    [math]E_{T}=\sqrt{E_{1}^{2}+E_{2}^{2}+E_{3}^{2}+E_{4}^{2}}=2E\rightarrow min(2\triangle p\triangle x\geq\hbar)

    [/math]

    Note, as the solutions are paired Terms of positive-negative energy, and negative-positive momentum

    fulfilled:

    [math]\left(\begin{array}{cc}

    imc^{2}-pc & -imc^{2}+pc\\

    imc^{2}+pc & -imc^{2}-pc

    \end{array}\right)=0[/math]

    [math]\left(\begin{array}{cc}

    mc^{2}+ipc\; & mc^{2}-ipc\\

    -mc^{2}+ipc\; & mc^{2}-ipc

    \end{array}\right)=0[/math]

    An example, found experimentally, the quantum entanglement. This effect is where the key to quantum mechanics. It is recognized that the change in the particle interlaced, to measure her mate is independant of the distance and occurs instantly. But this last assertion is an assumption, not been demonstrated either experimentally or mathematically. On the contrary, if it is allowed that virtual particles exceed the speed of light, in their ephemeral existence. But what happens to a virtual graviton?

    A virtual graviton, which has a typical energy of 1.5 x 10^-43 J

    This implies, that his time of existence, according to the uncertainty principle, it would:

    [math](\hbar/2)/1.5\cdot10^{-43}=351557484\, s[/math]

    At this time, at least can travel a distance of: c351557484= 1.05 x 10^17 m

    In other words, the perturbation produced in space-time, to perform the measurement on particle A, is transmitted, meaning through grid quantified spacetime, the particle B

    After doing experiments with such long distances such as those between one satellite-laboratory and laboratory on earth could possibly measure the change delay.

    Generally, the existence of mathematical singularities in physical theory; often tell us that the theory is incomplete. I am referring to a zero time in changing the particle B

    But as nature exibe extraordinary behavior; must be demonstrated both theoretical, and experimentally.

    Finally: an example of the existence of these dual virtual states, is the Casimir force. Force produced in the vacuum between two conducting plates

    [math]\frac{F_{c}}{A}=\frac{\hbar c\pi^{2}}{240d^{4}}

    [/math]

    Regards

    Mr. Doz,

    In the above you state, "This effect is where the key to quantum mechanics. It is recognized that the change in the particle interlaced, to measure her mate is independant of the distance and occurs instantly. But this last assertion is an assumption, not been demonstrated either experimentally or mathematically."

    William Tiller and Walter Dibble have experimentally demonstrated "information entanglement" in excess of 6,000 miles and have developed a theoretical framework, including some rather novel Fourier Transforms, which accounts for their empirical evidence. They refer to their framework as a "new" quantum physics, Psychoenergetic Science. Perhaps you would find their White Papers informative: http://www.tillerfoundation.com/White%20Paper%20VIII.pdf and http://www.tillerfoundation.com/White%20Paper%20VII.pdf.

    William Tiller received his Ph.D. in physics from the University of Toronto, spent five years in the R&D department of a fortune 500 corporation, 35 years as an active professor at Stanford University before becoming Professor Emeritus, he's published over 250 scientific papers (dealing mostly with solid state physics) in peer-reviewed journals, holds six patents, etc. Why the orthodox scientific community continues to ignore his work with Psychoenergetic Science is a great mystery - to me personally!

    With regards,

    Wes Hansen

    Mr. Doz,

    You know, another thing, many of the essays in this contest come to the same It from Bit = Bit from It conclusion that you do. I don't have the mathematical sophistication necessary to fully appreciate your argument but I am sympathetic to your position. The question I have posed in previous comments elsewhere on the forum is this:

    Many scientists like to point to simulations like the Game of Life and Tierra as demonstrating how true complexity can evolve from a few simple rules but every one of these simulations start with an ancestral pattern, where did the ancestral pattern underlying our very existence come from?

    With regards,

    Wes Hansen

    Dear, Wesley Wayne Hansen. In relation to the two papers that you you show me, I find them very interesting. I am aware of the last experiment was carried out between entangled states, for measuring the velocity of remote longline action, in the case of finite and greater than that of light, safe. The results give a lower limit of c1.38 x 10^4. The upper limit that I can make out, is 54446.7c

    The big question, I like: that's the real big question, which you do in the second post, and intelligently.Do not worry about not having sophisticated mathematical knowledge, for it is more important and rigorous logical thinking, that is the one that leads to ask the questions that are important, the big questions, that the most advanced science can not answer. Look I'm going to expose a relationship, that from my point of view is amazing, it makes you think maybe, in relation to that big question that you have done, and how smart already. It is a relationship that, by chance is impossible to be casual, and less to the degree of accuracy. Notice. First the data: mass of Earth, electron mass, equatorial radius Earth, Planck mass and Newton's gravitational constant.

    speed light in vacuum.

    [math]M_{earth}(function\, of\: g=9.80665\: m/s^{2})[/math]

    [math]

    r_{E-earth}=6378137\, m[/math]

    [math]m_{e}=9.10938291\cdot10^{-31}Kg

    [/math]

    Gn = 6.67428 x 10^-11

    [math]m_{pk}=2.176437508\cdot10^{-8}Kg

    [/math]

    1)

    [math]M_{earth}(g)=g\cdot(r_{E-earth})^{2}/G_{N}=5.97728\cdot10^{24}Kg

    [/math]

    And here comes the amazing!!!

    [math](m_{pk}/M_{earth})^{2}\cdot8=m_{e}\cdot G_{N}/(c^{2}\cdot r_{E-earth})

    [/math]

    http://pdg.lbl.gov/2013/reviews/rpp2012-rev-phys-constants.pdf

    http://pdg.lbl.gov/2013/reviews/rpp2012-rev-astrophysical-constants.pdf

    The answer to your question: God created all things.Today the world, both the scientist, etc, this conceited of his knowledge. conceited of his intelligence, when actually know much less than you might think. The arrogance has clouded their intelligence.As psychoenergetical, I have to say, that yes, indeed I myself have had experiences that today's science can not explain. Specifically: premonitory dreams with details, things that have happened after. But all this as you well know, is ignored by official science, ridiculed, etc.

    I do not care what I say now, can mean the stigma in this essay contest.This summer, quite possibly, in June there is a large-scale event that will lead to World War III.If you are interested in this little paper published in vixra, here I leave

    http://vixra.org/abs/1202.0064

    With best wishes

    • [deleted]

    If you think logically, the question comes down to this: so that, for example, a cell, which presumably comes from an evolutionary process, presumably; necessarily live in the external environment must know in advance external parameters; as terrestrial gravity, atmospheric pressure, temperature window; topology of the environment, etc, etc.This is completely impossible that something that does not exist yet know, for the wheel of fortune of evolution has knowledge before it exists, of these parameters, because if you do not know can not live.The theory of evolution, allow me to smile at me, is the most anti-scientific theory of all time.No claims on any side you look

    5 days later
    • [deleted]

    "Not know if you have read my essay. In the essay, I show, that must exist four solutions for positive total energy. And these solutions all involve energy and momentum components, imaginary. The existence of these unobservable states, virtual, giving the minimum value of Heisenberg uncertainty."

    The essay was read and the question of scientific method compliance remains... testability.

    Math provides possible worlds, the lab supplies the actual world.

      Totally agree: For this reason, I have proposed an experiment at large distances, with entangled particles, to verify the existence or not of a temporary delay in the change in the particle B, once the measurement on A. It would take distances on the order of 40,000 km, in order to measure a possible delay of about

      [math]2.4\times10^{-6}s

      [/math]

      , at most.The distances that have been used until now, do not allow a measurement, because of the instrumental limitation current time measurement.For a distance between particles A and B, of 160 Km (I think is the greatest distance experiment performed so far, including entangled particles), the delay time would be approximately ( maximum )

      [math]9\times10^{-9}s

      [/math]

      . While that for current measurement apparatus, would mask the reliability of the measurement, for these times to be less than the extent of accuracy of the instruments.The last experiment conducted last year, allowed to set a lower limit of

      [math]1.3\times10^{4}c

      [/math]

      . The upper limit, according to my calculations would

      [math]\exp(\alpha^{-1}/4\pi)c=54446.74c

      [/math]

      1/Alpha = 1/fine structure constant at zero momentum = 137.035999073

      regards

      25 days later

      Dear Angel

      Very admire your calculations, resulting in "it from bit = bit from it." I have a slightly different result is "it = bit from bit = it"

      at :http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1802

        Dear Hoang, you are pointed the most important thing of this essay: "nformation was created and governance by one the Deity is also not too ridiculous."

        Exactly: God created all things, include information.

        See above in my responses one phisyco-mathematical fourmula that proof your assertion

        Thank very much

        16 days later

        Angel,

        If given the time and the wits to evaluate over 120 more entries, I have a month to try. My seemingly whimsical title, "It's good to be the king," is serious about our subject.

        Jim

        Dear James: I have read your essay and you target the most important question of science: "Where did information come from to form

        our universe from nothing? Does its beginning offer any proof?"

        I could respond in many ways, but I think this I offer is of great beauty

        The name of God in Hebrew: YHWH, whose numerical value for each of its letters is:

        10565 Y=10 H=5 W=6 H=5

        This number contains in itself all the features of the universe.

        I will give several examples

        1) Omega_b = barion density of universe. In my essay I demonstrate the calculation of this value

        [math]\Omega_{b}=240-\exp(5+\ln^{2}(2))

        [/math]

        [math][\exp(\sqrt{3-\Omega_{b}})]\cdot\pi\cdot e\cdot\varphi\cdot\alpha^{-1}=10565

        [/math]

        [math]\alpha^{-1}=inverse\: fine\: structure\: constant=137.035999073

        [/math]

        [math]\varphi=(1+\sqrt{5})/2=golden\: number

        [/math]

        [math]e=that\: is\: the\: base\: of\: the\: natural\: logarithm

        [/math]

        Zero = infinity

        1 and 0, 10 was divided into two (yes, no, one, zero, positive negative: duality) = 5

        5 +1 = 6

        5 +0 = 5

        10565

        10+5+6+5=26 ; the famous number of dimensions of string theory

        2)

        [math]\ln\ln(10565)/10=\sin^{2}\theta_{w}

        [/math]

        [math]\theta_{w}

        [/math]

        is the mixing angle electro-weak

        3)

        [math]2\cdot\ln(m_{Pk}/m_{e})=\sqrt{10565}+(\ln(10565)-9)+\exp\exp-(17/10)

        [/math]

        mpk= Planck mass ; me = electron mass

        17= 1+0+5+6+5

        regards

        5 days later

        Dear Angel,

        Excellent ideas presented here. Very much along the lines of a theory I'm working on elsewhere. Like the use of Descartes' theorem. Also you concluded similarly to me that Bit is as fundamental as It - two sides of the same coin. Hope you get chance to take a look at my Fibonacci sequence based essay too.

        Best wishes & congratulations on a brilliant piece,

        Antony

          I already read your good essay, and rate it with 7

          The fibonacci numbers are more fundamentals that physicists think

          A very interesting example: the fine structure constan as a direct function of

          The golden mumber, phi; that is:

          [{[{(2 x phi^3 - 7)^4}/7] 21}/6 - 3 (163/6)]^-1 137= 137.03599907366175228= inverse fine structure constant at zero momentum

          163= 1^2 1^2

          1^2 2^2 =5

          1^2 2^2 3^2 = 14

          1^2 2^2 3^2 5^2 = 39

          1^2 2^2 3^2 5^2 8^2 = 103

          1,1,2,3,5,8. All consecutive fibonacci numbers divisors

          Of 240 ==> group E8

          And 1 ==> U(1) , 2 ==> SU(2) , 3 ==> SU(3)

          5 ==> SU(5) GUT

          [2 x In(mpk/me)] [ alpha^-1] = 240 = Kssing number 8D

          Regards

          Hello Angel,

          Thanks for reading and rating it - much appreciated. I think too that Fibonacci sequence must be more fundamental than thought, as they pass through zero, which is as fundamental as I can possibly imagine anything to be.

          Best wishes & congratulations on your great essay,

          Antony