Posts

An Exceptional Supersymmetry

An Exceptional Supersymmetry It is proposed in this article a way to construct an exceptional supersymmetry distinct from the family of usual supersymmetries usually labelled by N. (N=1, N=2, N=4 and N=8). It relies on the special properties of the root system of E 8 . It is a different kind of super-symmetry in that the superpartners don't have the same charge but together the charges from all the particles in the representation form a group. In a nut-shell we are assigning spins to elements of the E8 algebra and promoting them to super-symmetry operators. The special properties of E8 allows us to do this. Introduction The similarities between  N=8 Supersymmetry with 256 generators and the group E8 with 248 generators is suggestive that there might exist a combined structure with properties of both. Noting that E8 can be split into a bosonic part (a representation of O(16) ) and a fermionic part a spinor representation of O(16). We can assign a "spin" to each...

Higgs Units

These unit take the mass of the Top Quark (175GeV) equal to 1. Then we have approximately: m(top) = 1 m(H) = 1/ √2 m(W), m(Z)= 1/2 m(b) = 1/42 = 1/(6.7)    m(strange) = 1/1842 = 1/42^2 m(up) = 1/72000??? = 1/42^3 m(charm) = 1/141     (close to fine structure) m(down) <  1/182^2 m(tau) = 1/100   = 1/10^2 m(mu) = 1/1673  = 1/41^2  m(e)=1/345000 = 1/587^2   t(1)              b(A) c(B)             s(A^2) d(B^2)        u(A^3) A=1/42 B=1/135 m(v)=?=exp(-9) h=1 = 6.6[-34]m^2 kg/s c=1  = 3[8]m/s m(H)=2.22[-25]kg 1 s = 3*10^(-17) If we consider only mass^2 as important then we see: m(H)=1/sqrt(2), m(W or Z)=1/2, m(top)=1, m(bottom)=1/42 1 Length Unit = 1.0[-17]metres  /(1.414) 1 Time Unit = 3.3[-26] seconds   /(1.414) 1 Mass Unit = 2.22[-25]kg   (*1.414) G  = 6.67[-11]m^3/ kg/s^2 = 1.6[-35] Units = ex...

Temporal Logic in Relativity

Classical Temporal Logic In classical theory any two events satisfy a time ordering. We shall call this classical temporal logic CTL . The rules of classical temporal logic are very simple. Since they are just the rules of inequalities of real numbers: A>B    →   B<A !(A>B)   →  A<B or A=B A>B & B>C  →  A>C Or equivalently given that x  →  y is equivalent to saying that (!x or y) is true, these rules can be given by saying that in CTL these statements are always true: !(A>B) or B<A A>B or A=B or A<B !(A>B) or !(B>C) or A>C With these rules we can dispense with the underlying geometric idea of events as points in space-time and we have all we need to know to compare the temporal ordering of events. Relativity In relativity there are four possibilities for events. Either event A is is in the future light-cone of event B in which case we write A>B or A is i...

Compaitifying on a lattice

The Fourier transform the continuous variable "position" is the continuous variable "momentum". The Fourier transform of the interval around a finite dimension is an integer charge. Therefore particles of different charges are simply the different modes around a finite dimension. In position space we should also talk about position in compact space. Everything becomes geometrical. In momentum space we should talk about charge. Can we extend this to spin also? Is spin part of the position or momentum space picture? If X (a,b) = ((x+t,y+iz),(y-iz,x-t)) then X (a,b) X (-a,-b) = x^2+y^2+z^2-t^2. Perhaps this is the better momentum picture? What do a and b mean?  ++ -- +- -+ Ψ *(-a)( D (a,b)+i A (a,b)) Ψ (b) + ( D (a,b) A (c,d)- D (c,d) A (a,b)).( D (-a,-b) A (-c,-d)- D (-c,-d) A (-a,-b)) +m Ψ L(a) Ψ R(-a)                  = D(a,b)A(c,d)D(a,b)A(c,d) - D(a,b)A(c,d)D(-c,-d)A(-a,-b) X*(a,b) = X(b,a)

Expanding Universe in Milne Coordinates

If we have a particle (X,Y,Z,T) = (a(T),a(T),a(T),T) in comoving coordinates, in Milne coordinates this is: t=T cosh( a(T)*sqrt(3) ) x=T/sqrt(3) * sinh( sqrt(3)*a(T) ) which gives a parametric equation in T. We can plot these curves. e.g. for linear expansion we have the lines a(T) = v.T for various constants v.

All that can be known?

What is it that can actually be known in science? I suggest that all questions of science boil down to the following question: "What is the proportion of possible histories in which A happened that B also happened?" As an example: "What is the proportion of possible histories in which I ROLLED THIS DIE such that IT ENDS UP WITH 6 ON TOP?" Heuristically, we can say that the answer to this is (approximately) 1/6. 'Approximately', since there may be other factors that we are not aware of, the die could be waited for example.  Note that implicitly we are considering only a very small subset of possible histories beginning at the big bang. Namely ones that lead to a life-bearing planet on which humans evolved and eventually produced the intelligent(ish) bipedal life-form referred to in the question as "I". Further we are only considering histories in which I roll a die for some reason, perhaps I am playing Snakes and Ladders.  ...

M-Theory equals Loop Quantum Gravity?

A string world sheet can be decomposed into a sum of Feynman diagrams (graphs). Likewise a membrane should be decomposed into a sum of graphs also (or spin-networks). Hence Loop Quantum Gravity should be considered as a membrane theory. The differences are that Loop Quantum Gravity is a gravity only theory with no supersymmetry. It only exists in 4 dimensions whereas M-Theory exists in 11 dimensions.