Naturalness is nature

Theoretical Physicist Matt Strassler reported the “Naturalness 2014 Conference (hold on November 16, 2014, see http://profmattstrassler.com/2014/11/17/at-the-naturalness-2014-conference/ )”.

Naturalness: it is a question of “whether the laws of nature in our universe are “natural” (= “generic”), and if not, why not?”

What makes the Standard Model’s equations so “unnatural” (i.e. “non-generic”) is that many free parameters in the model must be some hand-picked numbers (as fine-tuning) without any way of deriving them with any theoretical base. Without these preset (fine-tuned) numbers, the entire Standard Model equations collapse into nonsense.

Most attempts of addressing this naturalness problem are by adding new principles or new particles (such as, supersymmetry, warped extra dimensions, little Higgs, etc.), but all these attempts failed thus far with the LHC run 1 (one) data. And, there is not much hope for them at LHC run 2 according the EDM and LHCb data. The following is the key comment exchanges on this issue.

Commenter 1 (Mike Anthis): I wonder how well the word “correct” can describe theory.

Commenter 2 (M. Many): You can never know that any theory is the final correct one unless you observe the universe from outside.

Matt Strassler: Even then you would not know.

How sad this conversation was! Fortunately, it is not the case. Instead of the ‘naturalness’ issue (defined by the Standard Model), this universe is in fact ‘locked’ by four-locks, as below:

Lock-one: Cabibbo angle (13.5 degrees), Weinberg angle (28.75 degrees), [(1/Alpha) = 137.0359 …]

Lock-two: Planck data (dark energy = 69.2; dark matter = 25.8; and visible matter = 4.82)

Lock-three: the pegs-lock which can only be opened by the exact pegs when they are inserted into the peg-key-holes. There are 48 peg-key-holes in this physical universe, and every peg is distinguished with a set of ‘name-codes’. The 48 matter particles form this pegs-lock.

Lock-four: {delta P x delta S > ħ} lock.

When a model can produce keys for these four-locks, it will be the ‘final correct’ theory.

Key one:
Beta = 1/alpha = 64 (1 + first order mixing + sum of the higher order mixing)
= 64 (1 + 1/Cos A (2) + .00065737 + …)
= 137.0359 …
A (2) is the Weinberg angle, A (2) = 28.743 degree
The sum of the higher order mixing = 2(1/48) [(1/64) + (1/2) (1/64) ^2 + …+(1/n)(1/64)^n +…]
= .00065737 + …
See, http://prebabel.blogspot.com/2012/04/alpha-fine-structure-constant-mystery.html

Key two:
Part one, the ‘iceberg model’: Let,
Space = X
Time = Y
Total mass (universe) = Z
And X = Y = Z
In an iceberg model (ice, ocean, sky), Z is ice while the (X + Y) is the ocean and sky, the energy ocean (or the dark energy). Yet, the ice (Z) will melt into the ocean (X + Y) with a ratio W.

By choosing W = 9% and with the known data of visible mass = 4.82%, then

[(Z – 4.82) x (100 – w)%] = {(33.33 – 4.82) x .91] = 25.94 (while the Planck data is 25.8), then, the dark mass/visible mass ratio was calculated as 5.38 (while the Planck data shows the ratio = 25.8/4.82 = 5.3526).

Part two, the ‘pimple model’: every SM fermion particle has the ‘identical’ mass while their measured ‘apparent’ mass is as a pimple. Among 48 SM fermion particles, only the first generation matter (not anti-matter, and not neutrino) give out visible lights. Again, some dark particles (with the ration W) do give out light.

Thus, the dark mass/visible mass ratio = [41 (100 – w)% / 7] . By choosing w = 9, the (d/v ratio = 5.33), then the visible light matter = 25.94/5.33 = 4.87 (while the Planck data shows that the visible matter = 4.82). Details, (see https://tienzengong.wordpress.com/2013/09/19/barked-up-the-wrong-trees-m-theory-and-susy/ ; https://tienzengong.wordpress.com/2013/09/25/dark-energy-mystery-no-more/ and http://scientiasalon.wordpress.com/2014/08/28/the-return-of-radical-empiricism/comment-page-4/#comment-6918 )”.

Key three, the ‘String Unification (SU)”: the sole mission of M-string theory is to ‘describe’ the SM particles with the M-string-‘language’ (the string unification). While M-string theory failed dismally after 45 years of trying, the G-string comes to its rescue and is the (key-three).

One G-string (a, b, c) has eight (8) strings.
String 1 = (V, A, A 1) = {1st , red, 2/3 e, ½ ħ} = red up quark.
String 2 = (A, V, A 1) = {1st , yellow, 2/3 e, ½ ħ} = yellow up quark.
String 3 = (A, A, V 1) = {1st , blue, 2/3 e, ½ ħ} = blue up quark.

See the entire description at http://scientiasalon.wordpress.com/2014/05/22/my-philosophy-so-far-part-ii/comment-page-2/#comment-2432 and http://putnamphil.blogspot.com/2014/06/a-final-post-for-now-on-whether-quine.html?showComment=1403375810880#c249913231636084948 .

Key four, the ‘dark energy’: {delta P x delta S > ħ} goes way beyond as ‘uncertainty principle’. It is the ‘source’ for the dark energy. See http://prebabel.blogspot.com/2013/11/why-does-dark-energy-make-universe.html .

With these four-keys, there will be no ‘naturalness’ problem anymore. By the way, these four-keys are known by many prominent physics, such as:

Peter Woit: see, http://scientiasalon.wordpress.com/2014/06/09/the-evidence-crisis/comment-page-3/#comment-3471

Coel Hellier (Professor of Astrophysics at Keele University in the UK): see, http://scientiasalon.wordpress.com/2014/06/05/the-multiverse-as-a-scientific-concept-part-ii/comment-page-1/#comment-3158

Advertisements