Bosons?

4 Decades of writings of Daniel P. Fitzpatrick Jr.

 

In message17799 of Theory of Everything http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TheoryOfEverything/message/17799

Hossein Javadi stated:

>> The Higgs boson has been called the missing link in the Standard Model of Particles and Fields, the theory that's been used to explain fundamental physics since the 1970s. Prior to 1995 the top quark was also missing, but then the experimental teams working at the Tevatron's two large detector systems, D-Zero and >>

 

Here's my 2 cents: (says Daniel P. Fitzpatrick Jr)

Whenever the total spin for a system is zero then that system can be considered a boson

  1. The Higgs boson may be a momentary spin up quark binding with a spin down quark, having the same equatorial spin plane, exactly the same as a spin up electron binds with a spin down electron to give sigma bonding.
  2. At this stage of the game, however, I'm not completely ruling out yet a quark to quark attraction (gravity, inertia) that may be non bosonic in character such as a momentary spin up quark binding with another spin up quark, having the same spin axis, exactly the same as a spin up electron binds with a spin up electron to give pi bonding.
  3. In both of the above cases - I'll bring in motion simply to horrify the quantum theorists - the closest sides of these electrons & quarks are moving in the same direction (like gears meshing and not clashing) thus obeying Ampere's Laws

     

    BUT

    Because this is quark to quark binding - not electron to electron binding - then the Higgs boson (if one indeed exists) MUST be quite heavy.

    Inertial mass and gravity are both nothing but quark to distant quark binding similar to the electron to electron binding that gives us the attractive forces in magnetism and sigma and pi chemical bonding and indeed even light quanta.

    When we witness - what Tony Bermanseder discussed here - the quark-anti quark behavior inside the tri quark entities then we are actually witnessing this momentary binding with distant quarks.

    In both cases of electron and quark binding the attraction does NOT fall off with the square of the distance. Only the number of binding couples falls off with the square of the distance, But then you must take into consideration Tony Bermanseder's caveat "It is not as simple as that." and it isn't because the distance is limited by other factors that i'm not going into here.

     

    A fermion has unbalanced spin and a boson has balanced spin.

    Anything with balanced spins can be considered, in effect, a boson.

    Even some balanced spin atoms are considered, by quantum theorists, to be bosons (Helium 4).

    What few now realize but WILL eventually is that ANY two, impedance matched, fermions, one with spin up and the other with spin down - even at an immense, finite distance - can bind together to form a momentary boson.

     


    Fitz
    (Fitz)





    Over 4 Decades of Daniel P. Fitzpatrick's Books, Papers and Thoughts

    Over 4 Decades of Fitzpatrick's Books, Papers & Thoughts http://www.amperefitz.com/4.decades.htm





     

    Below in BOLD are Mathematical Tony Bermanseder's comments on the above post. 

     Fitz wrote:

    Bosons?

    In message17799 of Theory of Everything http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TheoryOfEverything/message/17799

    Hossein Javadi stated:

    >> The Higgs boson has been called the missing link in the Standard Model of Particles and Fields, the theory that's been used to explain fundamental physics since the 1970s. Prior to 1995 the top quark was also missing, but then the experimental teams working at the Tevatron's two large detector systems, D-Zero and >>

    Here's my 2 cents:

    Whenever the total spin for a system is zero then that system can be considered a boson

    Fitz, you are closer to the mark than you realise, see my interleaving.

    (Gee I cannot change those colours, just to make it legible, so I apologise.)

  4. The Higgs boson may a momentary spin up quark binding with a spin down quark, having the same equatorial spin plane, exactly the same as a spin up electron binds with a spin down electron to give sigma bonding.
  5. At this stage of the game, however, I'm not completely ruling out yet a quark to quark attraction (gravity, inertia) that may be non bosonic in character such as a momentary spin up quark binding with another spin up quark, having the same spin axis, exactly the same as a spin up electron binds with a spin up electron to give pi bonding.

In both of the above cases - I'll bring in motion simply to horrify the quantum theorists - the closest sides of these electrons & quarks are moving in the same direction (like gears meshing and not clashing) thus obeying Ampere's Laws

Here it is, when you describe a codirectional motion for the quark-lepton coupling, you are actually DESCRIBING the DIQUARK coupling.

This diquark coupling is what DEFINES the quark-wavelet geometry in the Charm-Singlet, the Beauty-Doublet and the Truth-Triplet in the DoubleUp, the UpDown and the DoubleDown configurations respectively.

Recalling that the strange quark us the resonance down quark; you will automatically, using SU(3) Unitary Symmetry gernerate the only and correct diquark configurations with the Beauty-Magic doublet being diquark eigenstates up-down and up-strange and the Dainty-Truth-Super triplet being diquark eiegenstates down-down and down-strange and strange-strange respectively.

What you are now indicating is that the COUPLED INNER MESONIC RING or the OUTER LEPTONIC RING must be CODIRECTIONAL with their defining Kernel-Up-quark.

That is the up-quark does indeed have say spin 1/2, which MUST BE SHARED in the colourcharge bonding of QCD (quark magneto-asymptotic confinement) with either of the diquark rings.

So this is nothing less, than the UNIFICATION of quarks and leptons, as proposed by the supersymmetry (SUSY) models (as a derivative of the 11D-supergravity theory of Cremmer, Julia, Scherk in the Ecole Normale Superieure in 1978, based on the Kaluza-Klein framework of Calabi-Yau or Joycian conifolded spaces in the 11D/10D settings).

Well done Fitz, I hope that you can do something with my support here.

Btw, your post here, and your ideas about the Higgs Boson are also on the mark.

If you reread my technical post, then you will see that the neutral strange double-omicron mesonstate does indeed support your ideas of quark-antiquark coupling in bosonic eigenstates.

Actually the decay products for the top-antitop resonance at Fermilab and co. more or less 'verifies' the quark geometry of QR.

All you have to do is to decompose the energy groundstates and you find that the decay products for the Top-triplet and AS expressed in the double-omicron-state, do in fact clearly indicate that the decayproducts should be a beauty-antibeauty coupling with a W-plus-W-minus coupling. Precisely this is observed in the measurements.

Here is the QR quark-geometry expressed in quark notation.

Double-Omicron: Recall d=KIR=K+IR=u+IR; s=KOR=K+OR=u+OR

dsdbar+dbarsbard=(u+IR)(u+OR)dbar+(ubar+IRbar)(ubar+ORbar)d=(uubard)+(uubardbar)+(IRIRbar+ORORbar).

Now the bottom-diquark [b]=[ud] always manifests as bubar with anti-b being bbaru, so the first two products above are the bbbar system with energy in the region of 11 GeV.

Now the W+/W- weakons have energy of about 81 GeV each and are made up of the Leptonic OR-Ring with appropriate neutrino-antineutrino couplings to create the boson spins of -1/+1 respectively (those neutrino couplings are the decisive reason behind the nonparioty of the weak interaction).

So the combined energies are 2x81 GeV +11 GeV=173 GeV, as the groundstate for the top-antiquark decay as observed.

The mesonic double-system doubles this to the topo-antitop resonance of the order of 350 GeV as described by the Higgs Scale and my previous post.

So in the above the IR-IRbar VPE, (which hugs the neutrinoic kernel as wavecentre) decays in Weakon-neutrino association leaving the OR-ORbar leptonic ring system as the observed leptoinc W-ring VPE (Vortex-Potential-Energy).

And WHY is the top-quark-mass linked to the Higgs Boson?

Because the upper bound of the Dainty-diquark (the DoubleDown) is the strange neutrality of the Omicron system, which carries the predicted Higgs Boson Mass as eigenvalue.

The Dainty-diquark itself forms of course the lower bound for the downstrange=Top diquark system, upper bounded in the doublestrange or Super-diquark, bounded in the Fermi-Constant of the weak interaction, hence unifying the weak interaction with the strong interaction in the diquark and quark-lepton couplings of the INHERENT supersymmetry of the QR formalisms.

A very good deduction Fitz. Tony B.

BUT

Because this is quark to quark binding - not electron to electron binding - then the Higgs boson (if one indeed exists) MUST be quite heavy.

Inertial mass and gravity are both nothing but quark to distant quark binding similar to the electron to electron binding that gives us the attractive forces in magnetism and sigma and pi chemical bonding and indeed even light quanta.

When we witness - what Tony Bermanseder discussed here - the quark-anti quark behavior inside the tri quark entities then we are actually witnessing this momentary binding with distant quarks.

In both cases of electron and quark binding the attraction does NOT fall off with the square of the distance. Only the number of binding couples falls off with the square of the distance, But then you must take into consideration Tony Bermanseder's caveat "It is not as simple as that." and it isn't because the distance is limited by other factors that i'm not going into here.

A fermion has unbalanced spin a boson has balanced spin.

Anything with balanced spins can be considered, in effect, a boson.

Even some balanced spin atoms are considered, by quantum theorists, to be bosons (Helium 4).

What few now realize but WILL eventually is that ANY two, impedance matched, fermions, one with spin up and the other with spin down - even at an immense, finite distance - can bind together to form a momentary boson.


Fitz
(z)

--- In TheoryOfEverything@yahoogroups.com, "Hossein Javadi" <javadi_hossein@h...> wrote:

>

> New Results Change Estimate of Higgs Boson Mass

>

>

>

> New Results Change Estimate of Higgs Boson Mass

>

> In a case of the plot thickening as the mystery unfolds, the Higgs boson has just gotten heavier, even though the subatomic particle has yet to be found. In a letter to the scientific journal Nature, published in the June 10, 2004 issue, an international collaboration of scientists working at the Tevatron accelerator of the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (Fermilab), report the most precise measurements yet for the mass of the top quark - a subatomic particle that has been found - and this requires an upward revision for the long-postulated but still undetected Higgs boson.

>

> "Since the top quark mass we are reporting is a bit higher than previously measured, it means the most likely value of the Higgs mass is also higher," says Ron Madaras, a physicist with the U.S. Department of Energy's Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab), who heads the local participation in the D-Zero experiment at the Tevatron. "The most likely Higgs mass has now been increased from 96 to 117 GeV/c2" - GeV/c2 is a common particle-physics unit of mass; the mass of the proton measures about 1 GeV/c2 - "which means it's probably beyond the sensitivity of current experiments, but very likely to be found in future experiments at the Large Hadron Collider being built at CERN."

>

> The Higgs boson has been called the missing link in the Standard Model of Particles and Fields, the theory that's been used to explain fundamental physics since the 1970s. Prior to 1995 the top quark was also missing, but then the experimental teams working at the Tevatron's two large detector systems, D-Zero and

>

>

>

>

> New measurements of top quark mass at Fermilab have revised estimates for the mass of the Higgs boson.

>

>

>

>

> CDF, were able to discover it independently.

>

> Scientists believe that the Higgs boson, named for Scottish physicist Peter Higgs, who first theorized its existence in 1964, is responsible for particle mass,

You can read the rest of this lenghty article In message17799 of
Theory of Everything http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TheoryOfEverything/message/17799

__________________________________________________


Love from the DragonHeart!

As a mathematical physicist, I also study ancient scrolls and the signature can be evaluated on a number of levels; from childishly naive to profoundly esoteric---Tony Whynot, Unicorn of SophiaGnosis !

ARMAGEDDON=DRAGONMADE=ANDROMEDAG=MARRY7=GODNAMEDRA=82 =666+1=1+2+3+...34+35+36+1=1+2.2+3.3+5.5+7.7+11.11+13.13+17.17

http://au.msnusers.com/quantumrelativity

 

 

 

 

--- In TheoryOfEverything@yahoogroups.com, "Hossein Javadi" <javadi_hossein@h...> wrote:

>

> New Results Change Estimate of Higgs Boson Mass

>

>

>

> New Results Change Estimate of Higgs Boson Mass

>

> In a case of the plot thickening as the mystery unfolds, the Higgs boson has just gotten heavier, even though the subatomic particle has yet to be found. In a letter to the scientific journal Nature, published in the June 10, 2004 issue, an international collaboration of scientists working at the Tevatron accelerator of the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (Fermilab), report the most precise measurements yet for the mass of the top quark - a subatomic particle that has been found - and this requires an upward revision for the long-postulated but still undetected Higgs boson.

>

> "Since the top quark mass we are reporting is a bit higher than previously measured, it means the most likely value of the Higgs mass is also higher," says Ron Madaras, a physicist with the U.S. Department of Energy's Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab), who heads the local participation in the D-Zero experiment at the Tevatron. "The most likely Higgs mass has now been increased from 96 to 117 GeV/c2" - GeV/c2 is a common particle-physics unit of mass; the mass of the proton measures about 1 GeV/c2 - "which means it's probably beyond the sensitivity of current experiments, but very likely to be found in future experiments at the Large Hadron Collider being built at CERN."

>

> The Higgs boson has been called the missing link in the Standard Model of Particles and Fields, the theory that's been used to explain fundamental physics since the 1970s. Prior to 1995 the top quark was also missing, but then the experimental teams working at the Tevatron's two large detector systems, D-Zero and

>

>

>

>

> New measurements of top quark mass at Fermilab have revised estimates for the mass of the Higgs boson.

>

>

>

>

> CDF, were able to discover it independently.

>

  • Scientists believe that the Higgs boson, named for Scottish physicist Peter Higgs, who first theorized its existence in 1964, is responsible for particle mass,

    You can read the rest of this lenghty article In message17799 of
    Theory of Everything http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TheoryOfEverything/message/17799

 

 

Over 4 Decades of Fitzpatrick's Books, Papers & Thoughts:  http://www.amperefitz.com/4.decades.htm
And here's this page duplicated in Adobe.pdf:

http://www.amperefitz.com/4.decades.pdf

 

Fitzpatrick's website is at http://www.amperefitz.com

 

Another older website carrying Fitzpatrick's works FREE is: http://www.rbduncan.com

 

 Thank you, World Scientist Database - - Daniel P. Fitzpatrick Jr.

Have a good day & visit my site at goodreads:

http://www.goodreads.com/user/show/276352

Click ANY of these links to get what you want

 

****

Read my latest book FREE: (these two links below)

http://www.amperefitz.com/ua_20071020_ck_ds_jm_ds.pdf (This is the book in Adobe)

or

http://www.amperefitz.com/unvasleep.htm (This book link opens faster if you have dial up.)

While all the links on this page are OK and presently working, unfortunately only about two thirds (2/3) of the links I gave, years ago, as proof (click & see: http://www.amperefitz.com/presskit.html) for statements in this latest book, published in the year MMVl, are now still working BUT your search engine will probably take you to a similar area where you should be able to read similar proof material.