Now have predictions for neutrino masses and second Higgs

Foundations of physics and/or philosophy of physics, and in particular, posts on unresolved or controversial issues

Now have predictions for neutrino masses and second Higgs

Postby Yablon » Tue Sep 04, 2018 8:39 pm

To all:

Here is the latest draft of my paper: ... es-3-0.pdf

But I have put it in a new thread because with this draft, I have completed the re-parameterization of all twelve elementary fermion masses including the neutrinos, and have predictions for the neutrino masses which can be tested for in the lab. These are in (16.2) and (16.3).

I also have the prediction nailed down for the second Higgs boson mass, see (17.1). This is one of the four masses I listed as possible in an earlier post, but it is not the one I originally thought was correct, nor is it the one I later thought was correct. So, after very careful development, as they say in the game shows, "this is my final answer." This too should be detectable and it turns out to be only a few MeVs above the proton and neutron masses. (At the moment, I am not reading anything into this other than coincidence.)

I have also changed the title of the paper, because although this started with Kaluza-Klein, it is now definitively re-centered as a theory of fermion masses. That I was able to nail the isospin-up quarks, then the isospin-down quarks, then use the same basic method to nail the charged leptons, and now, also extract the neutrinos, still has me reeling when I think about it. Especially that the pathway to doing so started in Kaluza-Klein theory, of all places.

As some of you know, I have been pursuing the question of why the elementary particles have the masses they have since I first learned in 1970 in high school chemistry class that nobody knows why the protons and neutrons have the masses they have in relation to electrons. In 2012-2013 I nailed the protons and neutrons and a whole slew of light nuclide binding energies. I have always wanted to nail the elementary fermion masses, but until the last 60 days I was unsure if I would ever be able to do so. Now I have done so, and am ecstatic at having cracked open one of nature's toughest nuts.


PS: I can now reveal that in early July, my original DKK paper was not accepted, following a referee report which did not say that anything was wrong, but which said that the paper was "unclear" because I had claimed in passing that the Dirac portion of the theory could lead to a Higgs connection and understanding fermion masses, but not backed it up. So I have spent since then backing this up, and taking all twelve fermion masses off the table as unconnected masses by connecting them with what turns out to be eleven other parameters (see (16.14)) all within experimental errors. Doing so shows that this is indeed sound science. And I can thank the referee for calling me out on this and pushing me to finally solve this deeply fundamental problem.
Independent Physics Researcher
Posts: 365
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 10:39 pm
Location: New York

Return to Sci.Physics.Foundations

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 guests

CodeCogs - An Open Source Scientific Library