“Super Unified Theory” revisited
One,
“Super Unified Theory” was published in April 1984 by {Tienzen
(Jeh-Tween) Gong}, and it is the base for Physics ToE which is expressed by {Physics
First Principle (PFP)} and five equations.
PFP: {the essence of this universe is "nothingness,"
and it must remain as nothingness at all times}
Expression of PFP:
1)
Sum (real + ghost) = 0, the essence
2)
Δ (real - ghost) > 0, the creations, a quantum
For the (+t, -t) universe:
The second order sum = {(+t)^2 + (-T)^2} ≠ 0, thus this doesn’t
work. That is, (-t) is not the ghost of (+t).
For (+/- t, +/- it) universe,
Sum (real + ghost) = 0 always.
Δ (real - ghost) > 0 always.
That is, a 4-time dimension universe can be and is
the expression of PFP.
This gives rise to Equation zero.
{Δs = (x, y, z) * C * Δt}; Δt, a quantum
T = time, S = space, C = light speed,
{(x, y, z) = trait vector}.
In AP (0), the S (space) is defined via
the equation 0.
Delta s = N * C * (Delta t)
= (i^n1, i^n2,
i^n3) * C * (Delta t) ................Equation zero
Let N = (i^{n1}, i^{n2}, i^{n3});
‘i’ is the imaginary number; n1, n2, n3
can take the number (1, 2, 3 or 4), as there are 4-time-dimensions in
‘time’.
Delta s = N * C * (Delta t).
N is, in fact, an Angle matrix
or trait matrix.
1, N gives rise to 64 quantum states {48 particles
(24 matter, 24 anti-matter) and 16 spacetime vacuum states}, a perfect language
(quark colors and genecolors) for particle zoo.
2, these 48 particles have {equal mass land} although
their apparent masses are different. This equal mass land is the basis
for the derivation of Planck CMB data.
3, the 4-time dimension is the basis for the
derivation of CC (Cosmology Constant).
4, Δt is a quantum {= a circle
with a circumference (= π), not a point}. As this π (the totality) is divided
by its 64 sub-quantum states {= π/64}, and this division number {= π/64} gives
rise to the mass-mixing angle = 28.75, the basis for
1)
The Alpha equation
2)
Mass distribution matrix:
5, it rules out ALL BSM (beyond Standard Model)
particles (such as SUSY, WIMPs, 4th generations, etc.).
6, it predicted the Vacuum Boson (mass =
125.46 Gev.) via the PCD (Prequark Chromodynamics) neutron decay process.
Equation Zero gives this universe a static framework.
Then, the interaction between Δs and Δt gives rise to a dynamic
equation,
F [AP (0) force] = K h / (delta t *
delta s) ................. Equation three, quantum gravity equation
Equation three is the basis for the DEFINITIONS of electric
charge (equation two) and mass (equation one).
m (mass) = ½ h v/C^2
= [ (½
h)/C] (1/ λ) = [ (½ h)/C] / Δs
………. Equation One
Mass is intrinsic defined {that
is, the Higgs mechanism is a total nonsense}.
q (charge) = (L * C)^(1/2) =
[(1/2)h * C]^(1/2) ........... Equation two
In physics ToE, both electric
charge and mass are defined (not free) parameters.
Then, equation four describes the Marco-universe
(the Cosmo).
Equation four = F (G(x), G(y)); G(x), G(y), see next
section
=
{[G(x), G(Y)]; [ΔS, ΔT]}, ΔS, ΔT
are not quantum parameters.
=
players/(play ground)
=
[(K/C) m(x) m(y)/ ΔS^2] = Newtonian
gravity (Equation four)
With the above five equations,
First, retrodiction:
Physics ToE derives ALL free parameters of SM (Standard
Model); the mass-mixing angle (= 28.75 degrees), the Alpha, the Vacuum
Boson mass (= 125.46), the mass distribution matrix. It also derives all the
foundational parameters of the cosmos (the CC and Planck CMB data).
These derivatives are the necessary and inevitable consequences
of AP (0) and of course are retrodictions.
Second, further predictions
It also has many very important secondary predictions:
1)
As the mass-mixing angle was compressed by 0.007
degrees, it predicts:
A positive mass density
A positive VEV
A positive CC
2)
The derivation equation of Planck CMB data predicts
a 9% dark flow (verified by the Hubble Constant tension observation.
3)
The Vacuum Boson mass = 125.46 Gev.
Third, negative prediction:
Prohibit ALL BSM particles.
See https://tienzen.blogspot.com/2026/01/deep-conversations-on-final-toe-1_4.html
for the detail info about the above summary.
Two,
Revisiting ‘Super Unified Theory (SUT)”
The entire foundation of Physics ToE was outlined in SUT (published
in 1984, US copyright © TX 1-323-231; ISBN 0916713016).
1, Equation Zero, see page 41
2, equation one (definition of Mass), see page
28
Mass is intrinsically defined {that is, the Higgs
mechanism is total nonsense).
3, equation two (definition of electric charge), see
page 25
4, equation three (quantum gravity equation), see
page 27,
{F(12) = … }
5, equation of mass-mixing angle, see page 36
6, time is a quantum, see page 26
7, the concept of dark flow; this predicts the
acceleration of Cosmos expansion which was verified around 1997. See page 42
8, Vacuum Boson, see PCD neutron decay, page 19 - 20
9, particle zoo, see page 11 – 12
Three,
About the timeline
While we all agree that the validity of a theory does not
depend on ‘peer reviews’ nor on any authorities. But the credit (to whom) can
heavily depend on the timeline.
For example, the Vacuum Boson mass equation (= 125.46 Gev.)
appeared after July 4, 2012, then the newly discovered boson was credited to
Higgs mechanism while it cannot calculate its mass.
There are two analogies to this timeline issue.
First, there are two trees (Tree A and Tree B), one farmer
and a fruit forest.
The farmer found a new kind of fruit (weight = 125.46) from
the forest.
While not able to produce it (with the weight = 125.46), it ties
it to its branch and claims as its produce.
While Tree B did not check whether it has a fruit (weight =
125.46) before July 4, 2012, it can produce it (from its DNA, as a Vacuum
Boson, a product of the PCD neutron decay).
Which tree (A or B) truly produces this new fruit?
Second, some fundamental parameters of SM (Standard Model),
such as Alpha, mass-mixing angle = 28.75, new boson mass (= 125.46) cannot be
derived from SM. Some fundamental cosmological parameters (such as CC and
Planck CMB data) cannot be derived from the current paradigm.
A teacher gives these open issues to a student.
The student derives them all, of course after those parameters
are precisely measured. Thus, on the timeline argument that the student will
not get any credit for his derivational works.
Application: although this student derived the new boson
mass (= 125.46), he cannot get the credit as his written work appeared after
July 4, 2012.
See Online sources:
·
Higgs
Nonsense: enough is enough { https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/before-lhc-run-2-begins-enough-jeh-tween-gong/?trackingId=MEyU12OCQCC8R0SRYSDMYQ%3D%3D }
·
https://tienzengong.wordpress.com/
·
https://prebabel.blogspot.com/
·
https://tienzen.blogspot.com/
The timeline argument cannot be used in the case that a derivation
is an inevitable outcome of an eternal law. There is no difference between being
published 14 billion years ago or 14 billion years after.
The key is this ‘eternal law”, whether it is right or wrong.
As Physics ToE is able to reproduce ALL free
parameters of SM, the Higgs mechanism is total nonsense. That is, there is no
timeline issue on this new boson issue.
Four,
About the Math ToE
Math ToE consists of the following:
1)
Colored numbers
2)
Unreachable numbers
3)
Three infinite numbers (countable,
pseudo-uncountable, uncountable)
4)
Unilogy (not topology), transforming a ball to
donut (by punching two holes on the ball. This is a tagging mechanism which
unifies all domains (physics, math and life) with 7-codes.
Physics: (red, yellow, blue, white, G1, G2,
G3)
Math: (1, c, p, +, infC, infP, infU); 1/3
is a c, 2^(1/2) is p, π is a + number.
Life: (A, G, T, C, male, female, kids) = (A,
G, T, C, M, F, K)
1, colored numbers, see page 53
2, unreachable numbers, see page 61
3, three infinities, see page 64
4, Unilogy, see page 70
5, tagging mechanism, see page 59
Five,
About the Life ToE
Life ToE is connected to Physics and math via the 7-code
tagging mechanism, see page 76
Six,
About the ‘Peer Reviews”
Although {Super
Unified Theory, ISBN 0916713016, US copyright © TX 1-323-231) was published
in 1984 by {Tienzen (Jeh-Tween) Gong}, it was complete on December 4, 1979.
Then, Gong had 3 years of interactions with peers. Only after the fact that no
positive reviews were possible, it was published in April 1984.
1, the completion date, see page 83
2, reviews
By Department of physics, University of California, Berkeley;
on January 22, 1980 , see page 85
Key comment: {I am sorry, but we do not have anyone here who
has time to read your material.}
Interpretation: your work is nonsense.
By R. P. Feynman: {I am sorry not to be able to spend an
time considering your ideas, for I am working on quite different matter.} On October
6, 1980. See page 88
Interpretation: I (Feynman) am doing physics; your work is
crap.
By the Physical Review D, on October 25, 1983, see page 97
Key comment: {We regret to inform you that the subject matter
in these papers is outside the scope of the Physical Review. … We have made no
judgment on whether your work is correct or not, only that the subject matter
is not suitable for the Physical Review.} See page 97.
Interpretation: although being unable to point out any errors
in the papers, they conflict with the current tribal paradigm.
By ‘Reviews of Modern Physics’ on November 30, 1983, see
page 99
Seven,
(Super Unified
Theory) is widely available both online and as paper books, see below:
2)
Available at 80 university libraries, see https://search.worldcat.org/title/11223955
3)
Also available at http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+a+gong,+jeh+tween
4)
The
eBook edition is available at https://archive.org/details/superunifiedtheo0000gong_y0x9
No comments:
Post a Comment