Theory of Fermion Masses: Revamped neutrinos and beta decay

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

Theory of Fermion Masses: Revamped neutrinos and beta decay

Postby Yablon » Wed Nov 07, 2018 9:03 pm

To all:

It has been a couple of months since I last posted. A new draft is linked here:

https://jayryablon.files.wordpress.com/ ... s-4-0a.pdf

Since my last post I have advanced my paper on Kaluza-Klein and fermion masses in several ways.

1) I have fully revamped the neutrino mass section which is in section 19. This should a be final cut, and I am quite sure I have finally predicted these masses correctly. (The masses here are different than the ones I predicted last time -- I found experimental data about square mass differences that I was not fully cognizant of last time.)

2) I have expanded section 20 which contains the second Higgs boson prediction to review the exact manner in which the fermion mass results reduce 22 independent physics parameters in the natural world down to 11 parameters.

3) Section 21 adds the Lagrangian potential and plots for leptons. I was aware of the 50 TeV+ energies a couple of month ago, and have been wresting since with how to understand them.

4) Very importantly, in the process of trying to understand these 50 TeV+ energies, I have spent most of past few weeks writing brand new section 22, which as titled, explains "How Weak Beta Decays are Triggered by Neutrinos and Antineutrinos Interacting with Electrons, Neutrons and Protons via the Z Boson-Mediated Weak Neutral Current, with 'Chiral Polarization' of Electrons." This 25-page section could be a paper by itself. Bottom line: This is how beta decay really works and why beta decay lifetimes are what they are. The main reason for this post at this time is because I wanted to immediately put this new knowledge into the public domain as soon as I had it coherently written down on paper. As you will see, this ties together several disparate threads in our current state of knowledge, and really puts a microscope on what neutrinos are actually up to. Those little rascals! :D As you will see, neutrons and protons are actually neutrino detectors. Every beta decay event is actually the detection of a neutrino or antineutrino.

5) I have restructured the entire paper to make it a paper about fermion masses which one is able to understand based on Dirac-Klauza-Klein (DKK) Theory, rather than a paper about how DKK happens to lead to a theory of Fermion masses. Partly toward that end, and to prepare for submitting this now-160 page paper for referee review by the end of the year, I have added a preface including a "reader guide" intended for people who are very careful about the time they spend on a paper until they are sure their time is being well-spent.

I still need to add a section to regarding how the 50 TeV+ energies required for lepton beta-decay in Figures 12-15 in section 21 are obtained. Answer: fluctuations in the Planck quantum vacuum using the Planck-scale Higgs field of (13.4) through (13.6) that I set aside to spend sections 14-22 working with the fermions as we observe them in the Fermi vacuum. This is where Newtons's gravitational enters particle physics, and thus how gravitation influences what we observe in particle physics.

Happy reading!

Jay
Yablon
Independent Physics Researcher
 
Posts: 307
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 10:39 pm
Location: New York

Re: Theory of Fermion Masses: Revamped neutrinos and beta de

Postby Yablon » Thu Nov 08, 2018 2:05 pm

All,

I uploaded a draft with a few more changes to https://jayryablon.files.wordpress.com/ ... s-4-0e.pdf.

If you already looked at what I posted yesterday, start at page 157 and read to the end. I added about three pages regarding the neutron beam experiments, anisotropy of the CvB background, and the pedagogy of how we should think about atoms and nucei in the CvB background.

Best,

Jay
Yablon
Independent Physics Researcher
 
Posts: 307
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 10:39 pm
Location: New York

Re: Theory of Fermion Masses: Revamped neutrinos and beta de

Postby Yablon » Wed Dec 19, 2018 9:58 am

To all:

I just posted the latest update of this paper at https://jayryablon.files.wordpress.com/ ... -4.0bq.pdf.

Since my last post six week ago I have been reviewing and revising and fine-tuning this paper with the goal of submitting this for publication by the end of the year. At this point in time, all of sections 1 through 18 of the attached are fully reviewed and revised into a form that I am comfortable submitting.

Aside from everything being generally cleaned up, I substantially expanded section 10 to lay the foundation for using Einstein's Equation to more deeply develop the Kaluza-Klein aspects of this theory in a separate, subsequent paper.

But the main reason I am posting this right now while I still have the final review of the Lepton sections and the final beta decay section ahead, is because a couple of week ago it occurred to me that the relations (15.12) which I have had for several months now, can be used to develop a new "mass parameterization" (18.3) of the CKM quark mixing matrix. This in turn allows greater refinement of the data for quark masses at (18.10), the CKM standard parameterization mixing angles at (8.11), and the CKM matrix itself at (18.12). This was important enough for me to place into the public domain as soon as it was complete.

I will carry on from here with my review in advance of submission for publication.

Best to all,

Jay
Yablon
Independent Physics Researcher
 
Posts: 307
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 10:39 pm
Location: New York

Re: Theory of Fermion Masses: Revamped neutrinos and beta de

Postby Yablon » Wed Jan 09, 2019 11:02 am

To all:

Here is my latest draft, and this is close to being ready for journal submission.

https://jayryablon.files.wordpress.com/ ... s-4.2b.pdf

Since my post about three weeks ago, beyond continuing with proofreading and revising, I have added two new sections 23 and 24. You will recall that the last time, I added section 18 to develop a global unitarity fitting of the CKM quark mass matrix, which enabled me to tighten a number of parameters in the quark sector. So, I thought it best to do the same thing for the lepton PMNS angles, which is what I have added here.

As a result of this, there are two new substantive improvements that are brand new here, which is why I wanted this out in public at this time: First, the seeming oddity of having to add an extra energy (19.13) to the charged lepton mass sum in order to correctly fit two of the three real PMNS angles within experimental errors (at about 1.67 sigma each), is traced all the way through to its logical conclusion, and it turns out that this is the source of neutrino oscillations. In other words, these two new sections provide a theoretical explanation for why neutrino oscillations are required for all of the other particle physics data to fit together correctly. Second, at (24.9) through (24.11) I have utilized this development to suggest some experimentation that can better pinpoint the CP-violating phase for leptons, which is perhaps the most poorly-pinpointed parameter in all of particle physics, because at 3 sigma, its cosine can be anywhere between -1 and +1, which is indeterminate.

The one substantive issue that I still want to perfect before I submit this for peer review, has to do with the weak beta decay discussions, and it involves the very high peak at 240.37 GeV in Figure 8 for quarks, and especially at 51.77 TeV (yes, Tera-electron volts) in Figure 12 for leptons. Ever since I came across this ~50 TeV peak for leptons about 5-6 months ago, I have been somewhat perplexed as to how a lepton can acquire such a huge energy to jump over this peak during weak beta decay, and have not to date been fully satisfied with what I have come up with. For quarks I have been thinking that just a few Higgs boson masses can provide the necessary energy, thought I have still not been as precise about this as I would like. And for leptons, where the peak energy is gigantic, I have been resorting to the idea that low-energy fluctuations from the Planck scale reach down to provide this comparatively-small extra energy, even though this energy is still huge by particle facility standards. And this can be justified at some level, because of the entry of the gravitational constant into the determination of the neutrino mass eigenvalue sum, see (20.2). But, to date, I am still dissatisfied with my explanation, and if I was to critique by own explanation to date, I would have to say that is still involves some “handwaving.” So, this is really the last substantive question that I wanted to be able to understand and explain to perfection before I send this out to peer review.

Yesterday, I finally figured out the correct way to understand this, and the foundation for this is now added in the second, third and fourth paragraphs of section 17. But I expect I may need a couple of weeks from here to revamp all the beta decay discussion to do this the right way. Here is where I am going with this:

People loosely toss around the "Mexican hat" potential of the Higgs mechanism all the time. But it is really important to understand exactly what this potential really is, which is what I start to explain in these three paragraphs. What this really leads to, is that the Higgs boson not only has its ~125 GeV rest mass, but it also has a ~240 GeV potential energy arising from its interaction with the Fermi vacuum. So, the total Higgs boson energy from mass plus vacuum potential is ~365 GeV. This is more than enough energy to deal with the beta decay peak in Figure 8. But what this means is that at each beta decay vertex, there are four particles, with the fourth particle being the Higgs boson. What the Higgs brings to the table (to the vertex) is not only its rest mass, but a total energy of ~365 GeV, and this is enough to clear the peak for the quarks, give the W boson its mass (note the W has a -269.06 GeV negative potential energy in Figure 8, which makes the energy accounting work out), and give or take mass to or from the quarks at the vertex. Again, I have been aware for some months that the Higgs boson has a role in weak beta decay just as it does in giving particles their mass, but this is the precise understanding I did not have until last night, of how it executes this role.

Then fast forward to leptons and Figure 12 with its 51.77 TeV peak. This has been the most challenging piece of this research for me but now I have it: The second, brand new leptonic Higgs boson I have predicted, with a mass of 941.53 MeV (slightly higher than the proton and neutron masses), also has a huge potential energy of 51.77 TeV from its interaction with the vacuum, and it is this huge potential energy that helps leptons clear this huge beta decay peak. And this Higgs also comes to the table as one of the particles at what is now the four-particle beta decay vertex for leptons. Now, it may seem odd that a particle with a mass of about 1 GeV can have a potential energy from its interaction with the vacuum of about 50 TeV, which is about 50,000 times as large as its rest mass. But, when it comes to kinetic energy and special relativity, we deal with this sort of thing all the time, where extreme-relativistic particles have kinetic energies many times as large as their rest masses. The most notable example is the neutrino itself, which has a rest mass of less than .1 eV (I predict those masses precisely in (20.4)). So for example, from Figure 16, we see that solar neutrinos have total energies of about 10^6 eV (1 MeV), and so have kinetic energies which are more than ten million times as large as their rest energies. Extreme relativistic! So, it is now very easy to comfortably accept that this leptonic Higgs boson has a potential energy of interaction with the vacuum which is a comparatively-tame 50,000 times as large as its rest mass. As I finalize the paper, I will lay out precise energies for all of the particles involved, draw out the Feynman diagrams, and show the precise energy conservation accounting at each vertex, including how the uncertainty principle enters the picture for very small times before and lengths over which energies “borrowed” by the Higgs boson must be returned to the vacuum.

That's it for now, off on vacation through the weekend, then back to it next week.

Best to all,

Jay
Yablon
Independent Physics Researcher
 
Posts: 307
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 10:39 pm
Location: New York


Return to Sci.Physics.Foundations

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ahrefs [Bot] and 2 guests

CodeCogs - An Open Source Scientific Library