Search FQXi


If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at forums@fqxi.org with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Contests Home


Previous Contests

Wandering Towards a Goal
How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?
December 2, 2016 to March 3, 2017
Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fnd.
read/discusswinners

Trick or Truth: The Mysterious Connection Between Physics and Mathematics
Contest Partners: Nanotronics Imaging, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, and The John Templeton Foundation
Media Partner: Scientific American

read/discusswinners

How Should Humanity Steer the Future?
January 9, 2014 - August 31, 2014
Contest Partners: Jaan Tallinn, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, The John Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

It From Bit or Bit From It
March 25 - June 28, 2013
Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Questioning the Foundations
Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?
May 24 - August 31, 2012
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, SubMeta, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Is Reality Digital or Analog?
November 2010 - February 2011
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?
May - October 2009
Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams
read/discusswinners

The Nature of Time
August - December 2008
read/discusswinners

Forum Home
Introduction
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

Posts by the author are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.

By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use

 RSS feed | RSS help
RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

James Hoover: on 4/5/17 at 2:23am UTC, wrote Jeff and co-authors, As the contest draws to a close, I recheck those I've...

James Hoover: on 4/3/17 at 17:41pm UTC, wrote Jeff and co-authors, Such an effort is overdue. This is quite an important...

Vladimir Fedorov: on 3/12/17 at 11:47am UTC, wrote Dear Jeff, I am very glad that you interested in my work. In the "The...

Jeff Yee: on 3/11/17 at 15:57pm UTC, wrote Vladimir, Thanks... I read through your paper and have a couple of...

Vladimir Fedorov: on 3/11/17 at 11:01am UTC, wrote Dear Jeff, I appreciate your work, and your aspirations for the particle...

Jeff Yee: on 3/10/17 at 0:56am UTC, wrote Thanks Don for the comment. I was reading your web site and section on...

Don Limuti: on 3/9/17 at 23:16pm UTC, wrote Hi Jeff and associates, Your paper demonstrated how mathematical thinking...

Karoly Kehrer: on 3/4/17 at 22:43pm UTC, wrote Dear Jeff et.all I have to say, based on our long lasting cooperation,...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Jason Wolfe: "Start with a fact. The universe used to be small, rolled up about 13.7..." in Bohemian Reality:...

Jason Wolfe: "An afterlife falls into your lap with a few assumptions that are easy for..." in Bohemian Reality:...

Jason Wolfe: "Dear Lorraine, Consciousness in its simplest form will only seek out..." in Wandering Towards a Goal:...

Jason Wolfe: "Mystical religious beliefs are completely justified. it is the scientific..." in Wandering Towards a Goal:...

Joe Fisher: "Dear Foundational Questions Institute Members, Y’all made your initial..." in Our Place in the...

Joe Fisher: "Dear Eugene Lim and Richard Easther, “Undaunted by the lack of tools to..." in Our Place in the...

agaric backlink: "Obat Liver Paling Ampuh Cara Mengobati Bronkitis Paling Ampuh Cara..." in FQXi Essay Contest 2016:...

anil sharma: "Sometimes it is not possible to take care of infant babies especially while..." in FQXi Essay Contest 2016:...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

Our Place in the Multiverse
Calculating the odds that intelligent observers arise in parallel universes—and working out what they might see.

Sounding the Drums to Listen for Gravity’s Effect on Quantum Phenomena
A bench-top experiment could test the notion that gravity breaks delicate quantum superpositions.

Watching the Observers
Accounting for quantum fuzziness could help us measure space and time—and the cosmos—more accurately.

Bohemian Reality: Searching for a Quantum Connection to Consciousness
Is there are sweet spot where artificial intelligence systems could have the maximum amount of consciousness while retaining powerful quantum properties?

Quantum Replicants: Should future androids dream of quantum sheep?
To build the ultimate artificial mimics of real life systems, we may need to use quantum memory.


FQXi FORUM
September 25, 2017

CATEGORY: Wandering Towards a Goal Essay Contest (2016-2017) [back]
TOPIC: The Relation of Particle Numbers to Atomic Numbers by Jeff Yee, Yingbo Zhu, and Guofu Zhou [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Jeff Yee wrote on Feb. 17, 2017 @ 20:42 GMT
Essay Abstract

In this paper, we take the first steps of simplifying particles into a linear function that organizes particles based on their particle number, similar to how atoms are arranged by atomic number. This repeats the method that was used to organize atomic elements and create the Periodic Table of Elements in the 1800s. Now, the same process can be used for subatomic particles. The solution to linearize particles into a predictable function is not as simple as atomic elements, but it does exist. As with everything in physics, mathematics describes the universe in which we live and the same holds true for subatomic particles. We will introduce an equation that fits particles into a function that enables the prediction of future particle energies. It also predicts the exact mass of the elusive neutrino. Particles are first organized by particle numbers, similar to atomic numbers in the Periodic Table of Elements, and then charted against their known CODATA energy levels. The results will show similarities between particles and atomic elements – numbers where both are known to be more stable than their counterparts.

Author Bio

Mr. Jeff Yee (M.S. Management, B.S. Mechanical Engineering) and Dr. Yingbo Zhu (PhD Electrical Engineering) are visiting professors at South China Normal University, holding full-time roles in the electronics industry at ZTE and China Telecom respectively. Dr. Guofu Zhou (PhD Physics) is the founder and director of the Electronic Paper Display Institute at South China Normal University.

Download Essay PDF File




Author Jeff Yee wrote on Feb. 18, 2017 @ 01:12 GMT
New to the FQXi community, thanks to an invite from Declan Traill. It's been a pleasure reading through some of the essays (and rating), and it's great to see a forum such as this.



Yingbo Zhu replied on Feb. 18, 2017 @ 16:52 GMT
The same to me. Thank you Jeff, our essay is being post on this wonderful forum. I look forward to seeing more comments...

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Feb. 25, 2017 @ 08:59 GMT
Hello also Dr Zhu,tell hello also to Dr Zhou,you ahev pondered a general relevant papper.

Indeed this forum is wonderful the first innovant transparent Platform of theoretical physics, revolutionary for the global sciences community.China nd USA speaking together I like :) because universalism and altruism are the torchs of truth after all.China and USA even have the keys in hands to harmonise this planet.They can together reasure this sphere earth.Tell it to government :) we liberate the funds for this industrialisation of our solar system, and all wins without exception.Hope that USA CHINA G20 ONU WORLD BANK are conbscient in the high sphères of power that it is time to do it before the adds of several chaotical expoentials.....It is now in fact that it must be made.

Best

report post as inappropriate

Author Jeff Yee replied on Feb. 25, 2017 @ 15:13 GMT
Thank you for your comment. This is indeed a good opportunity for China and the US to work together. :)




Gary D. Simpson wrote on Feb. 18, 2017 @ 02:47 GMT
Jeff,

Welcome to FQXi. You present an interesting correlation. It seems to me that the true meaning of what you present is that the neutrino is the most fundamental building block of particles. It is very curious to me that the summation that you present is based upon the difference between the cubes of successive integers. I will need to ponder that for quite awhile.

Best Regards and Good Luck,

Gary Simpson

report post as inappropriate

Author Jeff Yee replied on Feb. 18, 2017 @ 03:00 GMT
Thanks Gary. This does indeed make the neutrino an interesting particle to study. I appreciate the feedback and hope you enjoy your weekend.




Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Feb. 18, 2017 @ 08:12 GMT
Dear Yee, Zhu and Zhou,

My complements for a nice research essay.

Good essay on trying to fit a nice co-relation between particle numbers and their known CODATA energy levels.

Your words … “We will introduce an equation that fits particles into a function that enables the prediction of future particle energies. It also predicts the exact mass of the elusive neutrino. Particles are first organized by particle numbers, similar to atomic numbers in the Periodic Table of Elements, and then charted against their known CODATA energy levels. ”... are good.

Your additional conclusions are Good.... “Focusing on the first 50 particle numbers, two more findings are observed:

• The stable particles (neutrino, electron and proton) fit exactly on the trendline. Although this may be merely a coincidence because the pion and tau electron also fit on the trendline, yet both of these particles decay.

• The leptons (neutrino and electron family of particles) are found at particle numbers that match stable atomic elements. In atomic elements, these are known as magic numbers. The first five magic numbers are 2, 8, 20, 28 and 50. This leaves the possibility of finding a neutrino particle at K=2 since this energy value does not match a known particle.”

Have look at my essay also it is also a research based essay…

Best wishes…

=snp. Gupta

report post as inappropriate

Author Jeff Yee replied on Feb. 18, 2017 @ 16:49 GMT
Yes, I will take a look at it now. Originally, I had focused on essays more similar to the research I did with my colleagues, but now I have gone through those that were similar, I will expand and read more. I'll take a look at yours now.



Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Feb. 19, 2017 @ 06:58 GMT
I just gave my reply below as a new post, Sorry I did not post them here

best

=snp.gupta

report post as inappropriate


George Kirakosyan wrote on Feb. 18, 2017 @ 08:23 GMT
Dear Jeff,

Your comment really is beautiful, thank you so much - our command becomes more!

Previously I can say that I have nothing against to neutrino, the electron is preferable because it is always under our hands (I mean it is much easy to detect and to study). Moreover, the neutrino does not have charge and mag. momentum that makes so much difficult to catch and to identify it. Principally, if we can to explain what is any particle on a 100% then we can understand almost everything!

I will study your work and to return again after short time!

Best wishes!

George

report post as inappropriate


John-Erik Persson wrote on Feb. 18, 2017 @ 10:50 GMT
Jeff

Thank you for good words about my paper.

I have also read your brilliant paper. I found it very interesting and have given it high points. I will read it several times since I do not know so much about the standard model.

Good luck.

Regards _____________________________ John-Erik

report post as inappropriate


Branko L Zivlak wrote on Feb. 18, 2017 @ 21:20 GMT
Dear Yee, Zhu and Zhou,

Approach is very interesting and promising further progress. It is very interesting to use K^4. This is common known for temperatures. I also get ^4 in other processes. How did you get K^4?

Have you an explanation for the gap between particle numbers 72 and 106 at figure 2.

Think of this. K=1 could be some hypothetical particle, not necessary neutrino. Then for neutrino K=2. Maybe it gives better results. My essay also is governed by mathematics.

Regards,

Branko

report post as inappropriate

Author Jeff Yee replied on Feb. 18, 2017 @ 21:33 GMT
You are correct that K=1 does not have to be the neutrino. It is possible that it is K=2, but that means the rest mass of the neutrino will be higher than the current range when it is ultimately found. It is a possibility.

The value for K^4 comes from a paper: Particle Energy and Interaction. It derives the rest energy of particles based on three dimensional standing waves. The particle number (K) affects the amplitude of this standing wave in each of the three dimensions (K^3). But the particle number also has an effect on the number of standing waves in the particle (K). The latter is assumed to be the particle radius where standing waves transition to traveling waves.

I'll take a look at your essay later today and will also send it to my colleagues. Thanks for the feedback Branko.




Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Feb. 19, 2017 @ 06:54 GMT
Dear Jeff Yee,

Thank you for your encouraging post on my essay. I am reproducing my reply here for your immediate perusal ...............

Thank you for your interest on my essay and good question...

Main problem was the length of the paper. I have to delete many related paragraphs to adjust for the acceptable length.

In this essay, the property of intent of the...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate

Author Jeff Yee replied on Feb. 19, 2017 @ 19:16 GMT
Thanks for taking the time to address my questions and glad you posted it here too (I don't think I get notifications for replies on a post on someone else's paper). You've addressed it andI'll also go back and read the comments field too per your suggestion.




George Kirakosyan wrote on Feb. 19, 2017 @ 08:03 GMT
Dear Jeff Yee

I have study your work (Particle energy .... in vixra.org).

I am very impressed with your huge work and I find very right things there, concerning to a wave-field common essence of everything. Particularly, You correctly have explained the double slit interference of particles (by the way it is much coincide with the mine!) and many useful things also are there.

However, I am forced to say some my regrets also. The standing wave concept of particles is really are very right and this will become much more productive for you if you will start from VORTEX NATURE of field and waves (with your phenomenal ability to working!) I just friendly recommend you carefully to study my works (not now, of course). I think your level will allow you to catch some very necessary trifles from there in short time. Then you can to develop your nice ideas more successfully!

Good wishes!

report post as inappropriate

Author Jeff Yee replied on Feb. 19, 2017 @ 19:08 GMT
George, I'd be happy to take a look. Can you send me a URL to the works?




Joe Fisher wrote on Feb. 19, 2017 @ 15:51 GMT
Dear Mr. Yee and Professors Yingbo and Guofu Zhou,

Please excuse me for I have no intention of disparaging in any way any part of your essay.

I merely wish to point out that “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler. Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955) Physicist & Nobel Laureate.”

Only nature could produce a reality so simple, a single cell amoeba could deal with it.

The real Universe must consist only of one unified visible infinite physical surface occurring in one infinite dimension, that am always illuminated by infinite non-surface light.

A more detailed explanation of natural reality can be found in my essay, SCORE ONE FOR SIMPLICITY. I do hope that you will read my essay and perhaps comment on its merit.

Joe Fisher, Realist

report post as inappropriate

Francis Duane Moore replied on Feb. 19, 2017 @ 23:18 GMT
Jeff, Your Table 1 shows the "missing mass problem". The total energy at the beginning of an atomic transition does not equal the end of transition energy from one element to another. The energy is described as "binding energy", and has never been properly described. The energy is "lost" meaning at the quantum field level in TPICT my essay connections are lost in the geometry of reconnection in the magnetic field. any CODATA values are misrepresented as to the influence of gravity at the quantum level.

I hope this is helpful,I believe we are getting closer to the basic unit of operation Sincerely Francis

report post as inappropriate

Author Jeff Yee replied on Feb. 19, 2017 @ 23:53 GMT
Francis, I want to make sure I understand this comment correctly from your post... "The total energy at the beginning of an atomic transition does not equal the end of transition energy from one element to another". Can you give an example?



Francis Duane Moore replied on Feb. 22, 2017 @ 20:47 GMT
study binding energy/ Where is it assigned? The before event or the later event,

report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Feb. 20, 2017 @ 06:47 GMT
Hello Mr Yee,

Congratulations for your essay.I see a relevant extrapolation towards this quantum weakest force this gravity,we see a relevant general method to find this force.But if I can and with humility Mr Yee, I beleive strongly that we must consider this quantum gravitation in an other way than our electromagnetic model,our standard model.This quantum gravity tending to infinity gas a problme.And I beleive that we must consider it not baryonic nor relativistic.This force so cannot be an emergent electromagnetic force.If the cosm and quant 3D sphères turns, it is not due to themro and heat it seems to me.Now imagine the dark matter the supermassive BHs in the cold and that these BHs produce these particles of gravitation and that these particles are cold and speeder than c.See that in this reasoning, the aether is gravitation from the central cosm singularity, the central biggest BH creating the speeder spherons,I named them like that.That is why I have invented this equation about matter energy.E=mc²+ml² we have a road towards the entire infinite gravitational entropy Mr Yee in fact.This cold seems essential.We have not a problem of equivalence when we consider the number of BHs and the number of spherons,because spherons are speeder and more numerous than photons simply.This gravitational aerthe from this cosm singularity is connected with our quantum cnetral singularities,that is why I have inserted quantum BHs with forces stronger than nuclear gluonic forces and spherons encoded them weaker than photns of our electromagnetism.So we can see this standard model encircled by this ngravitation.I loved your work permitting to rank better our standard model.It is very relevant and thanks for sharing your works and researchs.That improves our datas,you complete the postulates and laws.I am wishing you all the best Mr Yee in this contest ,good luck from belgium.

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Feb. 20, 2017 @ 06:53 GMT
Sorry for my errors in English,I would say the quantum gravity tending to infinity has a problem of equivalence.

all my reasoning implies that photons are not the main primordial informations, but spherons yes when we consider that a photon is a spheron coded with its intrinsic comportments of equilibriums of this heat by this cold.What I find relevant is thefact to consider the spherons like a serie of spherical volumes from the central biggest spherical volume.A primordial serie appears in logic, this serie is p^robably the same than our cosmological serie in its pure finite serie, its pure serie of uniquenss,between 1 and x.See that in this logic ,the gravitation is the real chief orchestra because this gravity encodes gravity and that ourn standard model is, just like a fuel,a system of electromagntic photonic dynamics simply.

All the best

report post as inappropriate

Author Jeff Yee replied on Feb. 20, 2017 @ 16:34 GMT
Steve, thank you for the feedback. I'm curious about the "l" in your energy equation ml2. I imagine it cannot be length (l) because the units would not align for energy. I'm curious to learn more. On a separate note, my colleagues and I also have an upcoming paper on gravity. We didn't address it in this essay for FQXi, but given your comments on quantum gravity, I would be happy to share it with you offline if you would like to exchange works and see if there is any similarity.



Steve Dufourny replied on Feb. 20, 2017 @ 21:26 GMT
You are welcome Mr Yee,

If you want,I will be happy,with pleasure,I search answers :) and I like study news ideas and works about this weakest quant force.The paradox is that this force is in the same time the strongest when we consider that this standard model is encircled by this cold gravitation if I can say.In fact I consider even that a photon is a spheron coded ,like if this thermo...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate


Declan Andrew Traill wrote on Feb. 21, 2017 @ 02:14 GMT
Jeff,

This finding is very interesting and may well hold some clues to the underlying structure of the particles in terms of WSM (Wave Structure of Matter).

It would have been better, though, if you had explained how this work fits into the topic of the essay "Wandering Towards a Goal" and how goal oriented structures emerge. As I pointed out in my essay the formation of particles is the most important reason that allows goal oriented structures to emerge in the Universe, so you should discuss this too, to show how your work fits into the essay topic.

Regards,

Declan Traill

report post as inappropriate

Anonymous replied on Feb. 21, 2017 @ 06:06 GMT
Yes, fair point about the essay topic of "Wandering Towards a Goal". Since the essay is already submitted, it will be addressed here in the comments section.

We took the topic literally to establish a goal of understanding the basic particles which constitute the atoms and molecules of complex systems. Today, it seems that we've lost sight of a goal that simplifies the structure of particles. Instead, we spend billions of dollars to find new particles, and award Nobel prizes, without recognition that nature may not be as complex as we make it seem to be.

"Wandering towards a goal" takes us off the path of complexity to search for simplicity. Our analogy that we raised was the time period in the 1800s when atoms where simplified to a nuclear structure based on proton count. In our belief, we need a similar goal now to simplify particles. As the essay topic suggests, mathematical laws give rise to these intentions, and we have used simple math to take the first step that particles may indeed be simpler than current literature has us believe today.

report post as inappropriate


John-Erik Persson wrote on Feb. 22, 2017 @ 22:14 GMT
Jeff

I see that you have joined the CNPS COMMUNITY page. However, CNPS has 4 pages and COMMUNITY is not very interesting. The main page is www.naturalphilosophy.org and it has links to DATABASE and FORUM.

Regards ____________________ John-Erik

report post as inappropriate

Author Jeff Yee replied on Feb. 22, 2017 @ 22:19 GMT
John-Erik,

Thanks for the tip. I'll join the other one.

Jeff




Wilhelmus de Wilde wrote on Feb. 24, 2017 @ 16:21 GMT
Dear Jeff Yee,

Thank you for the intelligent observations and deductions you (and the co-authors of course) made in the essay.

The perceptions you made and its conclusions are very insightfull.

In my essay " The Purpose of Life" I am searching for the origin of our consciousness that is the cause of all our thinking about past events (facts ?).

It is of course quite a different approach as yours but I hope that you will anyhow find some time to read and or rate it.

best regards

Wilhelmus de Wilde

report post as inappropriate

Author Jeff Yee replied on Feb. 24, 2017 @ 16:29 GMT
I'd be happy to give it a read... thanks for bringing it to our attention, and appreciate the comment on ours.




Peter Leifer wrote on Feb. 27, 2017 @ 10:19 GMT
Dear Jeff, I'm sorry for the delay!

I shortly read you essay. The main question is: why one needs the linear function of the mass vs particle number? The last one looks like artificial value since as far as we know that the dynamical nature of the inertial mass is unknown. I try to find the mass of electron but the work is not finished. Are you really hope to find something in a tricky way without deep understanding?

Best regards,

Peter

report post as inappropriate


Francis Duane Moore wrote on Feb. 27, 2017 @ 15:10 GMT
Your comment about my essay Proton Three Plane Immersion Connection Theory concerning "1/4" non conservation. My email fdmooredds@cox.net

Send your gravity paper as soon as possible. Gratefully yours Francis Duane Moore

report post as inappropriate

Francis Duane Moore replied on Feb. 27, 2017 @ 15:19 GMT
Hi Jeff, Have you studied the "mass defect" in binding energy for values above Z72 Thanks Francis Duane Moore

report post as inappropriate

Author Jeff Yee replied on Mar. 2, 2017 @ 16:12 GMT
Francis, no, haven't studied it yet and am currently traveling at the moment. After I return home will try to tackle this one. Regarding the gravity paper, will send to your email now.




Karoly Kehrer wrote on Mar. 4, 2017 @ 22:43 GMT
Dear Jeff et.all

I have to say, based on our long lasting cooperation, therefore having a first hand knowledge of your discoveries yous is the best. It introduces the readers to groundbreaking and sweepings discovery. Thanks.

Respectfully Dr.Karoly Kehrer

report post as inappropriate


Don Limuti wrote on Mar. 9, 2017 @ 23:16 GMT
Hi Jeff and associates,

Your paper demonstrated how mathematical thinking has some power to it. I like your idea of making a periodic chart of particles. You point to the neutrino as being the "proton" of the periodic table of particles.

My work also points to the neutrino as being the fundamental building block of particles (and photons). Some of what I have done may give you a boost in your work. Check out my website www.digitalwavetheory.com

Congratulations on your creative push to the future!

Don Limuti

report post as inappropriate

Author Jeff Yee replied on Mar. 10, 2017 @ 00:56 GMT
Thanks Don for the comment. I was reading your web site and section on neutrinos. I see the part about the link to photons and again on gravity (http://www.digitalwavetheory.com/36_Neutrinos_and_Gravity.h
tml). Is there somewhere on the site where you can refer me to neutrinos as the building blocks of particles? I'd love to see if there is any similarity.




Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov wrote on Mar. 11, 2017 @ 11:01 GMT
Dear Jeff,

I appreciate your work, and your aspirations for the particle table are close to me.

I want to give you a link to my essay, which deals with neutrino and the fractal structure of matter, which is confirmed experimentally. In my opinion, there are many levels of matter that differ in the constants of properties. All the elements of each level are neutrinos for the remaining levels, because they differ, first of all, by the angular momentum. By analogy of Maxwell, "the Maxwell gears are distinguished by the tooth module".

Therefore, I think that we should consider not one, but several tables of elementary particles, similar to the table of chemical elements, which differ in energy by 13.9 times.

Kind regards,

Vladimir

report post as inappropriate

Author Jeff Yee replied on Mar. 11, 2017 @ 15:57 GMT
Vladimir,

Thanks... I read through your paper and have a couple of questions. You mention that the electron is 137 quarks, which this number is related to the fine structure constant. But if it is 137 quarks, how would it explain that the electron's mass is much smaller than the proton's mass, which has 3 quarks?

Also, I was looking for more information about the energy differing by 13.9 times that you mentioned in your comment but I don't see it in the paper. Where is it?

Regards,

Jeff



Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov replied on Mar. 12, 2017 @ 11:47 GMT
Dear Jeff,

I am very glad that you interested in my work.

In the "The limiting elements of matter" section of my essay essay in the second paragraph (before the quark table) on page 7, the ratios of all the basic parameters of the limit elements are given.

Formulas for calculating the basic parameters of the limit elements (33) - (40) are placed in my first version of a...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate


James Lee Hoover wrote on Apr. 3, 2017 @ 17:41 GMT
Jeff and co-authors,

Such an effort is overdue. This is quite an important endeavor in organizing and ordering, contributing to better understanding and no doubt opening up avenues toward new discoveries, lie your reference to the equivalence of the proton.

Certainly discovery is part of seeking goals utilizing mathematical laws that have come before, just as this effort will spawn new laws.

I seek such a discover effort in the galactic field in terms of dark matter in my essay. Hope you get a chance to read it.

Jim Hoover

report post as inappropriate

James Lee Hoover replied on Apr. 5, 2017 @ 02:23 GMT
Jeff and co-authors,

As the contest draws to a close, I recheck those I've read to see if I've rated them. Bad accounting system and short memory. I see that I rated your important mission description on 4/3.

Hope you have enjoyed the interchange of ideas as much as I have.

Regards,

Jim Hoover

report post as inappropriate


Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:
Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.