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.

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

Current Essay Contest

*Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American*

Previous Contests

**Undecidability, Uncomputability, and Unpredictability Essay Contest**

*December 24, 2019 - April 24, 2020*

Contest Partners: Fetzer Franklin Fund, and The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation

read/discuss • winners

**What Is “Fundamental”**

*October 28, 2017 to January 22, 2018*

*Sponsored by the Fetzer Franklin Fund and The Peter & Patricia Gruber Foundation*

read/discuss • winners

**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 Fund.

read/discuss • winners

**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/discuss • winners

**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/discuss • winners

**It From Bit or Bit From It**

*March 25 - June 28, 2013*

*Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American*

read/discuss • winners

**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/discuss • winners

**Is Reality Digital or Analog?**

*November 2010 - February 2011*

*Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American*

read/discuss • winners

**What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?**

*May - October 2009*

*Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams*

read/discuss • winners

**The Nature of Time**

*August - December 2008*

read/discuss • winners

Current Essay Contest

Previous Contests

Contest Partners: Fetzer Franklin Fund, and The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?

Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fund.

read/discuss • winners

Media Partner: Scientific American

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

Forum Home

Introduction

Terms of Use

RSS feed | RSS help

Introduction

Terms of Use

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

RSS feed | RSS help

RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

**Paul Borrill**: *on* 8/7/13 at 22:16pm UTC, wrote Dear Yuri, I have now finished reviewing all 180 essays for the contest...

**Yuri Danoyan**: *on* 8/7/13 at 14:42pm UTC, wrote Dear Vladimir 18x0.017=0.306 3/10 approx 1/3 just confirmation of old...

**Vladimir Tamari**: *on* 8/7/13 at 6:48am UTC, wrote Dear Yuri You have gone deeply into this matter and found some...

**Wilhelmus de Wilde**: *on* 8/7/13 at 5:30am UTC, wrote dear Yuri, I rated you essay on 22 june Wilhelmus

**Jeff Baugher**: *on* 8/7/13 at 0:11am UTC, wrote Yuri, I regret that I had not been able to read your essay up until now. ...

**Christian Corda**: *on* 8/6/13 at 7:57am UTC, wrote Dear Yuri, As I promised in my Essay page I have read your enjoyable...

**Daryl Janzen**: *on* 8/3/13 at 23:26pm UTC, wrote Dear Yuri, Another interesting essay! Thank you for stopping by and...

**Yuri Danoyan**: *on* 8/1/13 at 17:58pm UTC, wrote Dear Olaf Thank you for constructional criticism of my essay. It benefits...

RECENT FORUM POSTS

**Stefan Weckbach**: "Hi Lorraine, in the case of the crashing twin-towers, the term “top-down..."
*in* The Present State of...

**Stefan Weckbach**: "Hi Steve, take also care Steve, and may the force of the three spheres be..."
*in* The Present State of...

**Jim Snowdon**: "Since evolving on our rapidly rotating planet, we have used it`s rotational..."
*in* The Quantum Clock-Maker...

**Steve Dufourny**: "a general universal clock of evolution irreversible correlated for me with..."
*in* The Quantum Clock-Maker...

**Georgina Woodward**: "If considering existence rather than appearances, the time dimension..."
*in* Anatomy of spacetime and...

**Georgina Woodward**: "That is about the 'anatomy"" of spacetime."
*in* Anatomy of spacetime and...

**Georgina Woodward**: "Thank you. Good luck."
*in* The Nature of Time

**Lorraine Ford**: "Rob, As you have not replied, I take it that you now concede that the..."
*in* 16th Marcel Grossmann...

RECENT ARTICLES

*click titles to read articles*

**The Quantum Clock-Maker Investigating COVID-19, Causality, and the Trouble with AI**

Sally Shrapnel, a quantum physicist and medical practitioner, on her experiments into cause-and-effect that could help us understand time’s arrow—and build better healthcare algorithms.

**Connect the Quantum Dots for a New Kind of Fuel**

'Artificial atoms' allow physicists to manipulate individual electrons—and could help to reduce energy wastage in electronic devices.

**Can Choices Curve Spacetime?**

Two teams are developing ways to detect quantum-gravitational effects in the lab.

**The Quantum Engine That Simultaneously Heats and Cools **

Tiny device could help boost quantum electronics.

**The Quantum Refrigerator**

A tiny cooling device could help rewrite the thermodynamic rule book for quantum machines.

RECENT FORUM POSTS

RECENT ARTICLES

Sally Shrapnel, a quantum physicist and medical practitioner, on her experiments into cause-and-effect that could help us understand time’s arrow—and build better healthcare algorithms.

'Artificial atoms' allow physicists to manipulate individual electrons—and could help to reduce energy wastage in electronic devices.

Two teams are developing ways to detect quantum-gravitational effects in the lab.

Tiny device could help boost quantum electronics.

A tiny cooling device could help rewrite the thermodynamic rule book for quantum machines.

FQXi FORUM

September 17, 2021

CATEGORY:
It From Bit or Bit From It? Essay Contest (2013)
[back]

TOPIC: If it from bit, what does it mean ?(Puzzle of number 18) by Yuri Danoyan [refresh]

TOPIC: If it from bit, what does it mean ?(Puzzle of number 18) by Yuri Danoyan [refresh]

Enigmatic link revealed between the values of mass some elementary particles and angle of 18 degrees. Shown the relationship 18 degrees with Golden ratio. It is surprising that, along with the angle of 18 degrees mass of some particles ( Higgs boson, the ratio of the mass of the proton and electron, some baryons) were a multiple of 18.

Independent researcher

An essay with real facts and relations linked for real experiments values and some mathematics non casual relations

Greteens

report post as inappropriate

Greteens

report post as inappropriate

This year the majority of essays are repetitions the same concepts: it from bit, etc

Too much , without matemathicals theories that can explain and demonstrate real phisycal facts,

Pure philosphy

My essay it is based in solid concepts phisycs and mathatics; leading to results and predictions,

Among others: mass particle dark matter of 9.21 Gev. Density dark energy= In(2); baryon density= 240- EXP(5+(In(2)^)= Omega(b)=0.04461..

Value of higgs vacuum and mass Higgs boson ( 126.177 Gev )

The calculation of fine structure constant at zero momemtum and the explanation for his value

The existence of extra demensions compacted in circles, 7

Etc

report post as inappropriate

Too much , without matemathicals theories that can explain and demonstrate real phisycal facts,

Pure philosphy

My essay it is based in solid concepts phisycs and mathatics; leading to results and predictions,

Among others: mass particle dark matter of 9.21 Gev. Density dark energy= In(2); baryon density= 240- EXP(5+(In(2)^)= Omega(b)=0.04461..

Value of higgs vacuum and mass Higgs boson ( 126.177 Gev )

The calculation of fine structure constant at zero momemtum and the explanation for his value

The existence of extra demensions compacted in circles, 7

Etc

report post as inappropriate

I am just wondering because 18Gev/2=9Gev

More precisely in my essay

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1619

r7 = minus radius 7d = 2.95694905822

[( 2sin(2Pi/r7)^2) x 9.21 Gev]/( tan(18) )^2=

126.17 Gev ( Higgs boson mass )

Larger radius 7d = 3.05790095612= l7

String one dimension 7d ( Particle in a box )

P(2,l7) = probability = ( sin(2Pi/l7) )^2 x (2/l7)

Higgs vacuum value= 246.221202 Gev = V(H)

P(2,l7) x V(H)= mh = 126.177 Gev ( Higgs

Boson mass )

report post as inappropriate

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1619

r7 = minus radius 7d = 2.95694905822

[( 2sin(2Pi/r7)^2) x 9.21 Gev]/( tan(18) )^2=

126.17 Gev ( Higgs boson mass )

Larger radius 7d = 3.05790095612= l7

String one dimension 7d ( Particle in a box )

P(2,l7) = probability = ( sin(2Pi/l7) )^2 x (2/l7)

Higgs vacuum value= 246.221202 Gev = V(H)

P(2,l7) x V(H)= mh = 126.177 Gev ( Higgs

Boson mass )

report post as inappropriate

Very sophisticated calculations are hard for my understanding...

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Particle_in_a_box

Are pure waves, sin, cos, tan

[(Pi)/cos(18)]^2 x 4Pi - [1/In(mZ/me)]= 137.035999073=

Alpha^-1

mZ = mass Z boson

2) Fibonacci numbers dividers of 240, group

E8: 1,2,3,5,8

1^2

1^2

1^2+ 2^2

1^2 + 2^2 + 3^2

1^2 + 2^2 + 3^2 + 5^2

1^2 + 2^2 + 3^2 + 5^2 + 8^2

= 163

Phi = golden number ; [ {[2(Phi)^3 -7]^4/7 + 21}/6 -3 + (163/6) ]^-1 + 137=

137.035999073

report post as inappropriate

Are pure waves, sin, cos, tan

[(Pi)/cos(18)]^2 x 4Pi - [1/In(mZ/me)]= 137.035999073=

Alpha^-1

mZ = mass Z boson

2) Fibonacci numbers dividers of 240, group

E8: 1,2,3,5,8

1^2

1^2

1^2+ 2^2

1^2 + 2^2 + 3^2

1^2 + 2^2 + 3^2 + 5^2

1^2 + 2^2 + 3^2 + 5^2 + 8^2

= 163

Phi = golden number ; [ {[2(Phi)^3 -7]^4/7 + 21}/6 -3 + (163/6) ]^-1 + 137=

137.035999073

report post as inappropriate

Dear Yuri

An interesting finding,but need for further research, perhaps you should make specific conclusions about it - your essay will be worth more.

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

report post as inappropriate

An interesting finding,but need for further research, perhaps you should make specific conclusions about it - your essay will be worth more.

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

report post as inappropriate

Hello Yuri,

Thanks for commenting on my essay earlier. I agree on the Ubiquitous nature of Fibonacci and the Golden Ratio. It is very interesting that you can relate 18 degrees to this and then onto several mass groups of empirical particles. There has to be more to this than coincidence. Nice discovery!

I related the mass of the Proton, Neutron and Electron to each other via Koide Formula using just Simplex geometry to get a 1/2 relationship to 0.4999999 - again geometry seems foundational. Also W and Z Boson to similar accuracy.

Best of luck & kind regards,

Antony

report post as inappropriate

Thanks for commenting on my essay earlier. I agree on the Ubiquitous nature of Fibonacci and the Golden Ratio. It is very interesting that you can relate 18 degrees to this and then onto several mass groups of empirical particles. There has to be more to this than coincidence. Nice discovery!

I related the mass of the Proton, Neutron and Electron to each other via Koide Formula using just Simplex geometry to get a 1/2 relationship to 0.4999999 - again geometry seems foundational. Also W and Z Boson to similar accuracy.

Best of luck & kind regards,

Antony

report post as inappropriate

Dear Yuri Danoyan,

I have down loaded your essay and soon post my comments on it. Meanwhile, please, go through my essay and post your comments.

Regards and good luck in the contest.

Sreenath BN.

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1827

report post as inappropriate

I have down loaded your essay and soon post my comments on it. Meanwhile, please, go through my essay and post your comments.

Regards and good luck in the contest.

Sreenath BN.

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1827

report post as inappropriate

Yuri,

Very interesting approach to this topic of 'it from bit' using correlations of the number 18 found in equations. I don't ever recall anyone else doing the same. Kudos for being original. I would have liked to see more contextual association with your analogy and perhaps a deeper understanding of how such numbers were caused.

Nonetheless, I hope you will find my current essay which unifies the four forces into one of interest and worthy of your review. As far as the Higgs boson is concerned, you may find the omission error relating to this 'discovery' of importance to your findings:

Assumed Higgs Boson Discovery Proved Einstein Right - See more at: http://temptdestiny.com/#sthash.LhS3jceI.dpuf

Best wishes,

Manuel

report post as inappropriate

Very interesting approach to this topic of 'it from bit' using correlations of the number 18 found in equations. I don't ever recall anyone else doing the same. Kudos for being original. I would have liked to see more contextual association with your analogy and perhaps a deeper understanding of how such numbers were caused.

Nonetheless, I hope you will find my current essay which unifies the four forces into one of interest and worthy of your review. As far as the Higgs boson is concerned, you may find the omission error relating to this 'discovery' of importance to your findings:

Assumed Higgs Boson Discovery Proved Einstein Right - See more at: http://temptdestiny.com/#sthash.LhS3jceI.dpuf

Best wishes,

Manuel

report post as inappropriate

Dear

Thank you for presenting your nice essay. I saw the abstract and will post my comments soon.

So you can produce material from your thinking. . . .

I am requesting you to go through my essay also. And I take this opportunity to say, to come to reality and base your arguments on experimental results.

I failed mainly because I worked against the main stream. The...

view entire post

Thank you for presenting your nice essay. I saw the abstract and will post my comments soon.

So you can produce material from your thinking. . . .

I am requesting you to go through my essay also. And I take this opportunity to say, to come to reality and base your arguments on experimental results.

I failed mainly because I worked against the main stream. The...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Dear Yuri

Your essay is very interesting and innovative.

18 degrees is the twentieth part of a full circle. What do you think of 2o may play an important role. I, for one not know how many the basic structure of the universe (atoms, ... Galaxy ...)? I would be grateful to anyone who answers this question, even if incorrect.

Regards

Ziki

report post as inappropriate

Your essay is very interesting and innovative.

18 degrees is the twentieth part of a full circle. What do you think of 2o may play an important role. I, for one not know how many the basic structure of the universe (atoms, ... Galaxy ...)? I would be grateful to anyone who answers this question, even if incorrect.

Regards

Ziki

report post as inappropriate

Dear Branko

I suspect 20 connected with Platonic solids dodecahedron(vertices-20) or icosahedron(faces-20)

See also Luminet http://www.cirs-tm.org/researchers/researchers.php?id=165

Reg

ards

Yuri

I suspect 20 connected with Platonic solids dodecahedron(vertices-20) or icosahedron(faces-20)

See also Luminet http://www.cirs-tm.org/researchers/researchers.php?id=165

Reg

ards

Yuri

Yes, 20 vertices in the dodecahedron, a proposed model for the fluctuations of the cosmic microwave background (J. P. Luminet). I like Week's paper because it explains Klein's model of the platonic solids from the Riemann sphere

http://arxiv.org/abs/math/0502566

The 10 vertices of half a dodecahedron corresponds to your number 18=180/10 and you have it at the end of my essay as a model of the pentagram (or its complement: the Petersen graph) on the real projective plane.

But be careful with the number-theoretical coincidences unless they follow from a solid physical model.

Michel

report post as inappropriate

http://arxiv.org/abs/math/0502566

The 10 vertices of half a dodecahedron corresponds to your number 18=180/10 and you have it at the end of my essay as a model of the pentagram (or its complement: the Petersen graph) on the real projective plane.

But be careful with the number-theoretical coincidences unless they follow from a solid physical model.

Michel

report post as inappropriate

Yuri,

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

report post as inappropriate

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

report post as inappropriate

The most interesting exceptional structures in physics such as the E8 group and octonions are associated with the symmetries of the dodecahedron and icosahedron where the 18 degree angles rule. Good to see an essay linking to some real experimental nymbers, good luck.

report post as inappropriate

report post as inappropriate

Dear Yuri Danoyan,

Thanks for your nice essay, well done

I enjoy reading it and rate it accordingly

If it from bit, what does it mean ?

very good question!

so my answer is: it is the Lagrangian~ which is everything physic is about

my essay may interest you

Bit: from Breaking symmetry of it

Hope you enjoy it

Regards,

Xiong

report post as inappropriate

Thanks for your nice essay, well done

I enjoy reading it and rate it accordingly

If it from bit, what does it mean ?

very good question!

so my answer is: it is the Lagrangian~ which is everything physic is about

my essay may interest you

Bit: from Breaking symmetry of it

Hope you enjoy it

Regards,

Xiong

report post as inappropriate

Copied from my essay blog:

It could be due to some aspect of the eigenvalues for gluons in a supergroup. The icosian has quaternions (roots) that have magnitude given by φ. The icosian is in a sense half of the roots space of the E8 group. The masses of hadrons is determined by the quark masses, which is induced by the Higgs field, and by the confinement properties of the QCD gauge field, called gluons. The differences in these fields in the Y-B plane is given by certain roots, and those roots in some cases have the magnitude of the φ = (1 + sqrt{5})/2

That is about the best I can conjecture at this point. There might in some way be some semblance of reason for this.

LC

report post as inappropriate

It could be due to some aspect of the eigenvalues for gluons in a supergroup. The icosian has quaternions (roots) that have magnitude given by φ. The icosian is in a sense half of the roots space of the E8 group. The masses of hadrons is determined by the quark masses, which is induced by the Higgs field, and by the confinement properties of the QCD gauge field, called gluons. The differences in these fields in the Y-B plane is given by certain roots, and those roots in some cases have the magnitude of the φ = (1 + sqrt{5})/2

That is about the best I can conjecture at this point. There might in some way be some semblance of reason for this.

LC

report post as inappropriate

Hi Yuri,

I gave you good grade for all these mystical formulas. I hope you find some physics in them in the future. So what do you think of my formulas

alpha/FSC =.007297352568, charge ^2=3, 27=3^3, m_e, m_p are electron and proton mass

M_p/m_e= (27/2)*(1/(alpha) -1) -1/3 = 1836.152654

adel

report post as inappropriate

I gave you good grade for all these mystical formulas. I hope you find some physics in them in the future. So what do you think of my formulas

alpha/FSC =.007297352568, charge ^2=3, 27=3^3, m_e, m_p are electron and proton mass

M_p/m_e= (27/2)*(1/(alpha) -1) -1/3 = 1836.152654

adel

report post as inappropriate

Dear Yuri,

After reading your essay I agree 18 is a very powerful number. How did you get this information. Very brilliant. I will rate you high.

I have two requests to make of you. Can you tell me whether Planck length have relationship with 18? Also take a look at my essay and let me know if 18 can be useful to improve it.

Many thanks,

Akinbo

report post as inappropriate

After reading your essay I agree 18 is a very powerful number. How did you get this information. Very brilliant. I will rate you high.

I have two requests to make of you. Can you tell me whether Planck length have relationship with 18? Also take a look at my essay and let me know if 18 can be useful to improve it.

Many thanks,

Akinbo

report post as inappropriate

Dear Sir,

This is with reference to your query to Dr.Weinberg.

Both space and time are emergent properties born out of the perception of sequence. While space is the interval between the ordered sequences of objects that also is the background structure, time is the interval between the ordered sequences of events, i.e., changes in structures by energy.

Dimension of objects is the perception that differentiates the “internal structural space” from the “external relational space”. Since such perception is mediated by electromagnetic interaction, where an electric field and a magnetic field move perpendicular to each other in a direction perpendicular to both, we have three mutually perpendicular directions. Dimension is used to determine the state of objects: if fixed, then solid, if fluid, then liquid and if loosely held, then gas, if not related to each other, then plasma radiation. Since time does not fit this description, it is not a dimension.

Number is a property of substances by which we differentiate between similars: if there are no similars, it is one otherwise many. Many can be 2,3,...n depending upon the sequence of individual perceptions. Infinity is like one: without similars. But whereas the dimensions of one are fully perceptible, i.e., discrete, the dimensions of infinity are not fully perceptible: analog and not the same as any discrete number. Since mathematics is accumulation and reduction of similars and partly similars, it is limited to discrete numbers and not analog infinities. Yet, like two different quantities can coexist, two infinities can coexist. Hence space-time coexist and being infinite, coexist with everything else. Thus, everything happens in space-time and it cannot loose its sense. We have written this to weinberg@physics.utexas.edu.

Regards,

mbasudeba@gmail.com

report post as inappropriate

This is with reference to your query to Dr.Weinberg.

Both space and time are emergent properties born out of the perception of sequence. While space is the interval between the ordered sequences of objects that also is the background structure, time is the interval between the ordered sequences of events, i.e., changes in structures by energy.

Dimension of objects is the perception that differentiates the “internal structural space” from the “external relational space”. Since such perception is mediated by electromagnetic interaction, where an electric field and a magnetic field move perpendicular to each other in a direction perpendicular to both, we have three mutually perpendicular directions. Dimension is used to determine the state of objects: if fixed, then solid, if fluid, then liquid and if loosely held, then gas, if not related to each other, then plasma radiation. Since time does not fit this description, it is not a dimension.

Number is a property of substances by which we differentiate between similars: if there are no similars, it is one otherwise many. Many can be 2,3,...n depending upon the sequence of individual perceptions. Infinity is like one: without similars. But whereas the dimensions of one are fully perceptible, i.e., discrete, the dimensions of infinity are not fully perceptible: analog and not the same as any discrete number. Since mathematics is accumulation and reduction of similars and partly similars, it is limited to discrete numbers and not analog infinities. Yet, like two different quantities can coexist, two infinities can coexist. Hence space-time coexist and being infinite, coexist with everything else. Thus, everything happens in space-time and it cannot loose its sense. We have written this to weinberg@physics.utexas.edu.

Regards,

mbasudeba@gmail.com

report post as inappropriate

Dear Sir,

We forgot to add: division of a number by zero is not infinity, but leaves the number unchanged. We have written about it in many forums without contradiction. In case you want the proof, you can write to us.

Regards,

basudeba

report post as inappropriate

We forgot to add: division of a number by zero is not infinity, but leaves the number unchanged. We have written about it in many forums without contradiction. In case you want the proof, you can write to us.

Regards,

basudeba

report post as inappropriate

Dear Sir,

Your essay brings out certain interesting facts, some of which may not be pure coincidence. 9 x 2 or 6 x 3 could be the reason, which needs to be investigated further.

The views of Wheeler have to be considered carefully in the light of the Copenhagen Interpretation, which does not enjoy its earlier status. Information must be about something. Hence that something and not...

view entire post

Your essay brings out certain interesting facts, some of which may not be pure coincidence. 9 x 2 or 6 x 3 could be the reason, which needs to be investigated further.

The views of Wheeler have to be considered carefully in the light of the Copenhagen Interpretation, which does not enjoy its earlier status. Information must be about something. Hence that something and not...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Hi Yuri,

I have read the paper you mentioned in my blog. It is interesting but it would be nice if you could explain a bit more how you got to those conclusions and numbers. We definetely have a few findings in common. Have you looked at my theory ?

Regarding your essay, I am sure that the 18 degrees is not a coincidence and the reason is because it is linked to the golden ratio. In a part of my theory, I speculate that the Planck length has got something to do with the golden ratio. In fact, I believe that it is just a scaled down version of the golden ratio, in the same way that the proton's diameter is a scaled up version of the Planck length and the proton's mass is a scaled down version of the Planck mass. Take a quick look at my formulae and you will understand what I mean.

Good luck with the contest.

Cheers,

Patrick

report post as inappropriate

I have read the paper you mentioned in my blog. It is interesting but it would be nice if you could explain a bit more how you got to those conclusions and numbers. We definetely have a few findings in common. Have you looked at my theory ?

Regarding your essay, I am sure that the 18 degrees is not a coincidence and the reason is because it is linked to the golden ratio. In a part of my theory, I speculate that the Planck length has got something to do with the golden ratio. In fact, I believe that it is just a scaled down version of the golden ratio, in the same way that the proton's diameter is a scaled up version of the Planck length and the proton's mass is a scaled down version of the Planck mass. Take a quick look at my formulae and you will understand what I mean.

Good luck with the contest.

Cheers,

Patrick

report post as inappropriate

Yuri,

"The most important,in our opinion, is the proton - to - electron mass ratio, the

rest mass of the proton divided by that of the electron (Mpr/Mel≈1836.15)."

Quite interesting theory. What do you see as the connection between the Higgs Boson and the mass it gives other particles in this "18" concept?

Jim

report post as inappropriate

"The most important,in our opinion, is the proton - to - electron mass ratio, the

rest mass of the proton divided by that of the electron (Mpr/Mel≈1836.15)."

Quite interesting theory. What do you see as the connection between the Higgs Boson and the mass it gives other particles in this "18" concept?

Jim

report post as inappropriate

I noted today in arXiv

http://arxiv.org/abs/1307.5308

Mixing Patterns from the Groups Sigma (n phi)

We survey the mixing patterns which can be derived from the discrete groups Sigma (36 x 3), Sigma (72 x 3), Sigma (216 x 3) and Sigma (360 x 3), if these are broken to abelian subgroups Ge and Gnu in the charged lepton and neutrino sector, respectively. Since only Sigma (360 x 3) possesses Klein subgroups, only this group allows neutrinos to be Majorana particles. We find only a few patterns that agree well with the experimental data on lepton mixing and predict the reactor mixing angle theta_{13} to be 0.1

http://arxiv.org/abs/1307.5308

Mixing Patterns from the Groups Sigma (n phi)

We survey the mixing patterns which can be derived from the discrete groups Sigma (36 x 3), Sigma (72 x 3), Sigma (216 x 3) and Sigma (360 x 3), if these are broken to abelian subgroups Ge and Gnu in the charged lepton and neutrino sector, respectively. Since only Sigma (360 x 3) possesses Klein subgroups, only this group allows neutrinos to be Majorana particles. We find only a few patterns that agree well with the experimental data on lepton mixing and predict the reactor mixing angle theta_{13} to be 0.1

Looks interesting Yuri,

I'm enjoying the comments above, and have downloaded the Hagedorn paper. I'll be back after reading your essay.

Have Fun,

Jonathan

report post as inappropriate

I'm enjoying the comments above, and have downloaded the Hagedorn paper. I'll be back after reading your essay.

Have Fun,

Jonathan

report post as inappropriate

B.T.W.

Only rectangle where perimeter is equal to square by number

P=2x(3+6)=18 S=3x6=18

P=S=18 1D=2D

report post as inappropriate

Only rectangle where perimeter is equal to square by number

P=2x(3+6)=18 S=3x6=18

P=S=18 1D=2D

report post as inappropriate

Dear Yuri -

The proton to electron ratio is indeed the most significant detail in the cosmos. It is the root of all reality, and if I'm not mistaken, your work offers a method of exploring it further.

In my work, I further re-evaluate our assumptions: something that must be done as thoroughly as possible before we can explore foundational questions usefully. I believe you will find this interesting, and hope you will soon have a look.

I have rated your essay, and I wish you the best of luck in the competition.

John

report post as inappropriate

The proton to electron ratio is indeed the most significant detail in the cosmos. It is the root of all reality, and if I'm not mistaken, your work offers a method of exploring it further.

In my work, I further re-evaluate our assumptions: something that must be done as thoroughly as possible before we can explore foundational questions usefully. I believe you will find this interesting, and hope you will soon have a look.

I have rated your essay, and I wish you the best of luck in the competition.

John

report post as inappropriate

Dear Yuri,

Following your question on my page, I partially answered in my post above.

"Yes, 20 vertices in the dodecahedron, a proposed model for the fluctuations of the cosmic microwave background (J. P. Luminet). I like Week's paper because it explains Klein's model of the platonic solids from the Riemann sphere

http://arxiv.org/abs/math/0502566

The 10 vertices of half a dodecahedron corresponds to your number 18=180/10 and you have it at the end of my essay as a model of the pentagram (or its complement: the Petersen graph) on the real projective plane."

I don't know if one can encode your 18 degrees =180/10 on some representation of the pentagram. This would be fascinating. Neither the pentagram nor its complement graph can be seen as built from a 'dessin d'enfant' that needs to be drawn on an oriented surface, as I explain at the end of my essay. But the pentagram graph can also be represented as the Desargues configuration (not shown in the essay)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desargues_configuration

Th

e latter may be built/stabilized by a dessin d'enfant (in fact many do the job) on the Riemann sphere. When I go to them, in a next publication, I will think about your observation.

Apart from the possible link to the Grothendieck's dessins, I found your observation very stimulating and will rate your essay accordingly.

All the best,

Michel

report post as inappropriate

Following your question on my page, I partially answered in my post above.

"Yes, 20 vertices in the dodecahedron, a proposed model for the fluctuations of the cosmic microwave background (J. P. Luminet). I like Week's paper because it explains Klein's model of the platonic solids from the Riemann sphere

http://arxiv.org/abs/math/0502566

The 10 vertices of half a dodecahedron corresponds to your number 18=180/10 and you have it at the end of my essay as a model of the pentagram (or its complement: the Petersen graph) on the real projective plane."

I don't know if one can encode your 18 degrees =180/10 on some representation of the pentagram. This would be fascinating. Neither the pentagram nor its complement graph can be seen as built from a 'dessin d'enfant' that needs to be drawn on an oriented surface, as I explain at the end of my essay. But the pentagram graph can also be represented as the Desargues configuration (not shown in the essay)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desargues_configuration

Th

e latter may be built/stabilized by a dessin d'enfant (in fact many do the job) on the Riemann sphere. When I go to them, in a next publication, I will think about your observation.

Apart from the possible link to the Grothendieck's dessins, I found your observation very stimulating and will rate your essay accordingly.

All the best,

Michel

report post as inappropriate

Great paper Yuri!

I think it's probably not just a meaningless coincidence that the number 18 keeps popping out for you, but it makes you wonder why someone else didn't notice the correlation sooner. I think the comments of Phil and Lawrence above are likely significant, or specifically that we may be seeing the octonions, quaternions, and icosians at work or evidence of E8 Physics. I talk a little about this in my essay this year. Nice work to put all of these particle relations in one place, though. Of course; the proton - electron mass ratio is especially significant, given that our bodies and the planet are made of them, along with their composite the neutron.

I looked at your viXra paper referenced above, disputing the significance of the Planck length, and my friend Steven Kauffmann is pretty adamant about this. You might want to read a paper of his A self-gravitational Upper Bound on localized energy which asserts that the maximum energy concentration possible occurs before we reach the Planck length. It is also discussed in this FQXi Forum.

More later,

Jonathan

report post as inappropriate

I think it's probably not just a meaningless coincidence that the number 18 keeps popping out for you, but it makes you wonder why someone else didn't notice the correlation sooner. I think the comments of Phil and Lawrence above are likely significant, or specifically that we may be seeing the octonions, quaternions, and icosians at work or evidence of E8 Physics. I talk a little about this in my essay this year. Nice work to put all of these particle relations in one place, though. Of course; the proton - electron mass ratio is especially significant, given that our bodies and the planet are made of them, along with their composite the neutron.

I looked at your viXra paper referenced above, disputing the significance of the Planck length, and my friend Steven Kauffmann is pretty adamant about this. You might want to read a paper of his A self-gravitational Upper Bound on localized energy which asserts that the maximum energy concentration possible occurs before we reach the Planck length. It is also discussed in this FQXi Forum.

More later,

Jonathan

report post as inappropriate

I also appreciate the comments you left on the page for Dimensional reduction...

The idea for 2-d quanta existing in 3-d space or 4-d spacetime comes up again and again. It absolutely does hint at the holographic principle at work, and to my mind it creates fractal boundaries - because the dimensions of space are not the same at all scales. I published a paper back in 2009 on Fractal Cosmology (attached below) in 'Chaos, Solitons, and Fractals,' and most of that content is still present in the Wikipedia article on that topic, which I also originated.

Enjoy,

Jonathan

attachments: CHAOS6406.pdf

report post as inappropriate

The idea for 2-d quanta existing in 3-d space or 4-d spacetime comes up again and again. It absolutely does hint at the holographic principle at work, and to my mind it creates fractal boundaries - because the dimensions of space are not the same at all scales. I published a paper back in 2009 on Fractal Cosmology (attached below) in 'Chaos, Solitons, and Fractals,' and most of that content is still present in the Wikipedia article on that topic, which I also originated.

Enjoy,

Jonathan

attachments: CHAOS6406.pdf

report post as inappropriate

Hello Yuri

Richard Feynman in his Nobel Acceptance Speech

(http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/19

65/feynman-lecture.html)

said: “It always seems odd to me that the fundamental laws of physics, when discovered, can appear in so many different forms that are not apparently identical at first, but with a little mathematical fiddling you can show the...

view entire post

Richard Feynman in his Nobel Acceptance Speech

(http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/19

65/feynman-lecture.html)

said: “It always seems odd to me that the fundamental laws of physics, when discovered, can appear in so many different forms that are not apparently identical at first, but with a little mathematical fiddling you can show the...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Yuri,

Fascinating! (and if I knew it was so concise I'd have read it much earlier!)

I'm a great fan of geometry over mathematics as a more precise descriptor of nature, and geometry is at the heart of your proof. It looks like there must be something fundamentally important to it.

I wonder if you can see anything in my own 3D geometry of curves and spheres based on the helix, and of higher order spaces, where your thesis may add light?

Scoring you now. Well done.

Best wishes

Peter

report post as inappropriate

Fascinating! (and if I knew it was so concise I'd have read it much earlier!)

I'm a great fan of geometry over mathematics as a more precise descriptor of nature, and geometry is at the heart of your proof. It looks like there must be something fundamentally important to it.

I wonder if you can see anything in my own 3D geometry of curves and spheres based on the helix, and of higher order spaces, where your thesis may add light?

Scoring you now. Well done.

Best wishes

Peter

report post as inappropriate

Dear Yuri:

I liked the quote from Wheeler. I am not sure I get the claim. It would really help if you could state the claim more clearly. What are the places where the angle of 18 appears? Are there exceptions? What works? What does not work?

The point with these kind of things is that they might signify something deep or they might just lead you astray. People have invested a lot of time on the fact that the fine structure constant is 1/137. Why 137? As far as I can tell no good reason has been given yet.

Also: It is not clear how this relates to the topic of the essay contest.

It would really help if you'd work on the presentation.

Cheers

Olaf

report post as inappropriate

I liked the quote from Wheeler. I am not sure I get the claim. It would really help if you could state the claim more clearly. What are the places where the angle of 18 appears? Are there exceptions? What works? What does not work?

The point with these kind of things is that they might signify something deep or they might just lead you astray. People have invested a lot of time on the fact that the fine structure constant is 1/137. Why 137? As far as I can tell no good reason has been given yet.

Also: It is not clear how this relates to the topic of the essay contest.

It would really help if you'd work on the presentation.

Cheers

Olaf

report post as inappropriate

Dear Olaf

Thank you for constructional criticism of my essay. It benefits rather than complimenting from nonprofessionals.

I will try to answer your questions.

1.My observation 18 deg concerning only pseudoscalar mesons where spin=0 and two charged leptons(mu and tau) where spin=1/2.But 18 deg no so important than symmetry around proton.This is an amazing symmetry was not noticed until now.

2.Puzzle of 137 is more sophisticate than 1836,because contains 3 components (c,e,h) whereas 1836 contains only one(mass) component

Cheers

Yuri

Thank you for constructional criticism of my essay. It benefits rather than complimenting from nonprofessionals.

I will try to answer your questions.

1.My observation 18 deg concerning only pseudoscalar mesons where spin=0 and two charged leptons(mu and tau) where spin=1/2.But 18 deg no so important than symmetry around proton.This is an amazing symmetry was not noticed until now.

2.Puzzle of 137 is more sophisticate than 1836,because contains 3 components (c,e,h) whereas 1836 contains only one(mass) component

Cheers

Yuri

Dear Yuri,

Another interesting essay! Thank you for stopping by and commenting on mine.

All the best,

Daryl

report post as inappropriate

Another interesting essay! Thank you for stopping by and commenting on mine.

All the best,

Daryl

report post as inappropriate

Dear Yuri,

As I promised in my Essay page I have read your enjoyable Essay. Here are my comments.

1) The phenomenon of 18 degrees is quite intriguing. In general, I do not think that such kind of phenomena in Science are coincidences.

2) I have always been intrigued by the Golden Ratio. The connection with the angle of 18 degrees is fascinating.

3) The relationship between the number of 18 and mass of quarks is really amazing.

4) Thanks for pointing out special properties of number 18, I did not know them. That number is really special.

5) Again, I do not think that the final coincidence between angle of 18 degrees and number 18 is an accidental coincidence.

I have found your Essay very intriguing and enjoyable. Thus, I am going to give you a high score.

I also suggest you to further proceed with your scientific research on the number 18.

Cheers,

Ch.

report post as inappropriate

As I promised in my Essay page I have read your enjoyable Essay. Here are my comments.

1) The phenomenon of 18 degrees is quite intriguing. In general, I do not think that such kind of phenomena in Science are coincidences.

2) I have always been intrigued by the Golden Ratio. The connection with the angle of 18 degrees is fascinating.

3) The relationship between the number of 18 and mass of quarks is really amazing.

4) Thanks for pointing out special properties of number 18, I did not know them. That number is really special.

5) Again, I do not think that the final coincidence between angle of 18 degrees and number 18 is an accidental coincidence.

I have found your Essay very intriguing and enjoyable. Thus, I am going to give you a high score.

I also suggest you to further proceed with your scientific research on the number 18.

Cheers,

Ch.

report post as inappropriate

Yuri,

I regret that I had not been able to read your essay up until now. While I do not have the background that some of the other commentators have, I very much like how you have presented the empirical evidence and left it as an open question.

Is it just a coincidence or is there something much deeper to it? Considering that you also point out that we aren't exactly sure what "mass" is (although I personally have another idea) then these bits of information such as the one you are pointing out may help us piece together the jig saw puzzle.

I have rated you highly for the empirical evidence and open question.

Kind Regards,

Jeff

report post as inappropriate

I regret that I had not been able to read your essay up until now. While I do not have the background that some of the other commentators have, I very much like how you have presented the empirical evidence and left it as an open question.

Is it just a coincidence or is there something much deeper to it? Considering that you also point out that we aren't exactly sure what "mass" is (although I personally have another idea) then these bits of information such as the one you are pointing out may help us piece together the jig saw puzzle.

I have rated you highly for the empirical evidence and open question.

Kind Regards,

Jeff

report post as inappropriate

Dear Yuri

You have gone deeply into this matter and found some interesting regularities. I have no expertise in this area of physics, but I do have a question: If you express the degrees in radians you will get a different value than 18. Does this affect your results in any way?

My own research also yielded an interesting angle: around 13 degrees related to the Strong Force. Is it a coincidence or meaningful ? I pose the same question as you have but in another scenario:

Three Magnetic Dipoles Provide a Physically Realistic Simulation of the Repulsive-Attractive Nature of the Strong Force and of the Cabibbo Angle

With best wishes in your work

Vladimir

report post as inappropriate

You have gone deeply into this matter and found some interesting regularities. I have no expertise in this area of physics, but I do have a question: If you express the degrees in radians you will get a different value than 18. Does this affect your results in any way?

My own research also yielded an interesting angle: around 13 degrees related to the Strong Force. Is it a coincidence or meaningful ? I pose the same question as you have but in another scenario:

Three Magnetic Dipoles Provide a Physically Realistic Simulation of the Repulsive-Attractive Nature of the Strong Force and of the Cabibbo Angle

With best wishes in your work

Vladimir

report post as inappropriate

Dear Vladimir

18x0.017=0.306

3/10 approx 1/3

just confirmation of old observation

http://vixra.org/abs/0907.0008

http://vixra.org/ab

s/1212.0030

18x0.017=0.306

3/10 approx 1/3

just confirmation of old observation

http://vixra.org/abs/0907.0008

http://vixra.org/ab

s/1212.0030

Dear Yuri,

I have now finished reviewing all 180 essays for the contest and appreciate your contribution to this competition.

I have been thoroughly impressed at the breadth, depth and quality of the ideas represented in this contest. In true academic spirit, if you have not yet reviewed my essay, I invite you to do so and leave your comments.

You can find the latest version of my essay here:

http://fqxi.org/data/forum-attachments/Borrill-TimeOne-

V1.1a.pdf

(sorry if the fqxi web site splits this url up, I haven’t figured out a way to not make it do that).

May the best essays win!

Kind regards,

Paul Borrill

paul at borrill dot com

report post as inappropriate

I have now finished reviewing all 180 essays for the contest and appreciate your contribution to this competition.

I have been thoroughly impressed at the breadth, depth and quality of the ideas represented in this contest. In true academic spirit, if you have not yet reviewed my essay, I invite you to do so and leave your comments.

You can find the latest version of my essay here:

http://fqxi.org/data/forum-attachments/Borrill-TimeOne-

V1.1a.pdf

(sorry if the fqxi web site splits this url up, I haven’t figured out a way to not make it do that).

May the best essays win!

Kind regards,

Paul Borrill

paul at borrill dot com

report post as inappropriate

Login or create account to post reply or comment.