Yuri Danoyan

What do you mean?

Model is not confirmative fact. I am ignored only prejudice.

You too...

Stable nucleus have limited life time. They are not stable. Most nuclear isomers are very unstable, and radiate away the extra energy immediately (on the order of 10-12 seconds). As a result, the term is usually restricted to refer to isomers with half-lives of 10-9 seconds or more. Quantum mechanics predicts that certain atomic species will possess isomers with unusually long lifetimes even by this stricter standard, and so have interesting properties. By definition, there is no such thing as a "stable" isomer; however, some are so long-lived as to be nearly stable, and can be produced and observed in quantity This is different matter...

I corrected my poor english,sorry...tri again This is the address autobiographical book by John Wheeler http://www.amazon.com/Geons-Black-Holes-Quantum-Foam/dp/0393319911/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1216810738&sr=1-2 http://www.amazon.com/Geons-Black-Holes-Quantum-Foam/dp/0393319911/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1216810738&sr=1-2 Especially advise you to pay attention to chapter 15. It from Bit, p.323 и 16.The End of Time,p344. Here it's very interesting discourse on the nature of Time.

i have some upgrade

They are not included in Particle Physics Booklet..They are atoms...right?

John Wheeler-brilliant scientist died 3 months ago. I would like talking about contradictory part his legacy written in the J. A. Wheeler, It from bit, At Home in the Universe, American Institute of Physics, New York, 1994, pp. 295–311. But first of all i want reminding some quotation from other book,"Geons,black holes & quantum foam" John Archibald Wheeler's autobiography with Kenneth Ford Norton, 1998 Wheeler summarizes his work as follows: "I think of my lifetime in physics as divided into three periods. In the first period, extending from the beginning of my career until the early 1950's, I was in the grip of the idea that Everything Is Particles. I was looking for ways to build all basic entities - neutrons, protons, mesons, and so on - out of the lightest, most fundamental particles, electrons, and photons. This same vision of a world of simple particles dominated my work with Feynman. We were able to formulate electrodynamics in terms of particles acting at a distance on one another without the need for intermediate electric or magnetic fields. ...It did ... make a most remarkable prediction about a hypothetical world containing only a few particles ... In such a simpler world, the future would affect the past. "I call my second period Everything Is Fields. From the time I fell in love with general relativity and gravitation in 1952 until late in my career, I pursued the vision of a world made of fields, one in which the apparent particles are really manifestations of electric and magnetic fields, gravitational fields, and space-time itself. "Now I am in the grip of a new vision, that Everything Is Information. The more I have pondered the mystery of the quantum and our strange ability to comprehend this world in which we live, the more I see possible fundamental roles for logic and information as the bedrock of physical theory. ... I continue to search." Geons, Black Holes & Quantum Foam - pp 63-64 I would like drew attention of Forum participants to last part of John Wheeler research.Does we get some confirmation about it? I presented my simple interpretation John Wheeler's idea "It from Bit.If we rewriting some numbers(for examples: symmetries, dimensionless constants,different dimensions D=3,D=11,D=12, etc) from decimal code to the binary code and vice versa, we get more information."More is different".Quote from mentioned book P.341. My confirmative posts: 1)Discrete and continue symmetries 2)What Wolfgang Pauli does mean? 3)Wonderful number 12 on the spectrum of elementary particles We vill show that next decimal numbers in binary code: 3 to binary 11 as a sign of symmetry 11 to binary 1011 as a sign of metasymmetry 12 to binary 1100 as a sign of antysymmetry John Wheeler book At Home in the Universe (Masters of Modern Physics) (Paperback) http://www.amazon.com/Home-Universe-Masters-Modern-Physics/dp/1563965003/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1216585362&sr=1-4

Does not change sense...

composite" and "elementary," as used here, contradict each other O.k. how about next? "Only 3 particles are stable with a half-integer spin (proton, electron, neutrino) and 1 is stable with an integer spin (photon)., This is not Numerology. This is only observation and general conclusion.

The proton is stable composite elementary particle. No free quarks. see also my threads: http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=34160 http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=34142 http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=34201

See my thread in future http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=34145

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_physics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuous_symmetry

2 interesting articles devoted to Pauli legacy 1)"Concepts of Symmetry in the Work of Wolfgang Pauli" http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/archive/00003913/01/PauliSymmetries_net.pdf 2)"Pauli’s ideas on mind and matter in the context of contemporary science" http://www.igpp.de/english/tda/pdf/paulijcs8.pdf W. Heisenberg book address http://www.amazon.com/Physics-BeyonW. Heisenbergd-Conversations-Werner-Heisenberg/dp/B000GJXVZ6

All quarks and leptons are fermions.Due to their half-integer spin, as an observer circles a fermion (or as the fermion rotates 360° about its axis) the wavefunction of the fermion changes sign. A related phenomenon is called an antisymmetric wavefunction behavior of a fermion. 12 to binary 1100, as we noted before, antisymmetric record. That the hint to hidden connection between different manifestations of antisymmetry.

Can you read my other threads? I have suspicion about hidden connection between N=12 and the minimum number of dimensions of a crystal lattice whose symmetry rotations and reflections form the Monster group is 196884. Because ln196 884=12.19. My be it is good hint for string theoreticians.Also for 11-dimensional M-Theory.

As is well known all matter is made of 12 particles: 6 quarks and 6 leptons. I would like to show that some numbers in the spectrum of mass of elementary particles one way or another connected with enigmatic number N=12. Consider natural logarithms mass of quarks and exploring them: Mu=1.5- 3 Mev; Md=3-7 Mev; lnMu=0.4-1.09; lnMd=1.09-1.94 Ms=70-120 Mev; Mc=1160-1390 Mev; lnMs=4.24-4.78; lnMc=7.05-7.23 Mb=4130-4270 Mev; Mt=170900- 177500Mev; lnMb=8.32-8.35; lnMt=12.04-12.08 As we see, natural logarithms values of mass next (express in round numbers): 1;2;4;5;7;8;12. Draw attention to absent numbers divisible to 3(3,6,9) except last number N=12 . Interesting puzzle! Ratio 3:1 Limiting number is 12. Consider the values of lepton mass(except neutrino), their logarithms. Me=0.510 Mev; lnMe = -0.67; ln Me/ln Me=1; Mmu=105.65 Mev lnMmu=4.66; ln Mmu/ln Me= - 6.95; Mtau=1777 Mev; lnMtau=7.48; ln Mtau/ln Me= -11.64; In the case of leptons we have the (express in round numbers)1,7,12. Limiting number N=12 Quotent 11,64/6,95=1,6 B.t.w. close to Golden Mean or 1.618. In the case of electrical charges, there is a surprising number in magnitude when you equate alfa, a fine-structure constant, to 1. alfa=e^2/hc=1/137; e=e if alfa=e^2hc=1 e=11.7 We obtain a value of charge close to N=12 as a limiting number. Heaviest meson mass Upsilon m=11020Mev equal to 11.74 mass of proton.Close to number N=12. Heaviest baryon mass Bo Mass m = 5620.2 ± 1.6 MeV This is equal 5.98 mass of proton. Long-lived baryons mass limited by 6 proton mass.Number of quarks also 6.Accidental coincidence ! Conclusion. 1.Values of mass (logarithms) basic elementary particles(fermions) are restricted by some limit number N= 12. 2.My be there is hidden connection between numbers of quarks and leptons,logarithms of their mass und numbers of proton mass containing in heavier particles mass? References: http://pdg.lbl.gov/

What Wolfgang Pauli does mean? I meet book W..Heisenberg (Physics and Beyond, Harper and Row, New York (1974), where talking about some Christmascard send by Pauli to Heisenberg about some incomplete idea. Text was very enigmatic: "Division and reduction of symmetry, this then is the kernel of the brute! The former is an ancient attribute of the devil." i send letter to Professor Hans Primas, a explorer legacy of Pauli for more detail and get letter From Hans Primas Professor for Theoretical Chemistry at ETH; Zuerich, Switzerland Dear Yuri Danoyan, The original German quotation is: "Zweiteilung und Symmetrievemindeung, das ist des Pudels Kern. Zweiteilung ist ein sehr altes Attribut des Teufels. (Das Wort Zweifel soll urspЁ№nglichch Zweiteilung bedeutet haben)." It is in a letter by Pauli to Heisenberg, who quote it (without given the date of the letter) in: W. Heisenberg, Wolfgang Paulis philosophische Auffassungen, Die Naturwissenschaften, vol. 46 (1959), pp.661-663. It is again quoted in W. Heisenberg, Der Teil und das Ganze , Piper Verlag , Muenchen (1969), p.317. In the English translation of this book (Physics and Beyond, Harper and Row, New York (1974), p.234) it is translated as: "Division and reduction of symmetry, this then is the kernel of the brute! The former is an ancient attribute of the devil." It is notoriously difficult to translate Pauli's striking and succinct German in another language. Here Pauli refers to Goethe's Faust, part 1, second scene "Faust's study": To my mind Pauli enigmatic phrase "Division and reduction of symmetry" can get more clear and plain if used John Wheeler idea "Everything is information". I would like to show couple of examples where Pauli-Wheeler united idea let to get some ineresting results: 1)Mp/Me=1836 Dividing this record half-and-half and every half sum up get 99; 9+9=18 1+8=9; 9 to binary 1001.Beautiful mirror symmetry look like charge conjugation. 2)Fine-structure constant 137 137 to binary 10001001.Dividing this record half-and-half we get two decimal numbers 1000 and 1001.For full identity better be 1000 and1000,but reminding about CP-violation about 1/1000. Exactly the same value...here.

We have 2 different kinds of symmetry: discrete and continous. Basic difference between them: Discrete symmetry is static symmetry (reflections,parity,etc). Not demanding motion,change in time. Continous symmetry is dinamic symmetry.Demanding motion (rotations,translation,shifts,etc), change in time. The motion supposed to be different velocity (from small to relativistic). When we going to relativistic velocity object get different Lorentcian deformations and continous symmetry lost its sense. We get some kind of self-rejection of continous symmetry. 1)Does discrete symmetry only real symmetry? 2)There are exist some universal symmetry where included both symmetries discrete and continous? I introduced some universal symmetry call Metasymmetry where included both symmetries discrete and continous? Now to Methasymmetry. If we try to represent discrete symmetry and continuous symmetry with minimal means by using at least two symbols, what should we do? We can use signs 0 and 1 Then the minimal discrete symmetry may be represented as 10 or 01 and minimal continuous symmetry as 11.In this case, to represent continuous symmetry we used some APPROXIMATION without which our reasoning would be impossible. Now, going back to symmetry between the discrete and the continuous we may use representation of one version as 1011. What can be said about Methasymmetry now? A general conclusion is as follows: the ratio of the total number of zeros (unities) to that of unities (zeros) makes up certain invariant ratio of 3:1 or 1: 3. This is the numerical measure of Methasymmetry. This idea independently close to John Wheeler's "It from bit". In Nature we often come across the ratio 3:1, or 1:3, the sequence being of no importance: 1. Space is 3-dimensional and Time is 1-dimensional. 2. Only 3 elementary particles are stable with a half-integer spin (proton, electron, neutrino) and 1 is stable with an integer spin (photon), 3. 3 of 4 fundamental interactions (strong, electromagnetic, weak) are relatively closed by their intensity magnitude but are greatly different from gravitational Again the 3:1 ratio. 4. In the Standard Theory of weak electric interaction bosons (W+, W-, Z) have a mass but a proton does not. Again we have the 3:1 ratio. 5. Beta decay where 1 neutron converts into a proton, an electron and a neutrino. Again the 3:1 ratio. 6. Mmin u-quark/Mel+ 1.5Mev/0.51 Mev = 3:1 ratio. 3:1 may be the fundamental symmetry of the Universe? The binary representation of 3:1 ratio is 11:1. Just one symbol used. It from bit or not?

In the Book P.Fraenkel, Yehoshua Bar-Hillel, FOUNDATIONS OF SET THEORY, North-Holland, 1958 you can read following : "The bridging of the chasm between the domains of the discrete and the continuous,or between arithmetic and geometry, is one of the most important - may, the most important - problem of the foundations of mathematics....Of course, the character of reasoning has changed, but,as always, the difficulties are due to the chasm between the discrete and the continuous - that permanent stumbling block which also plays an extremly important role in mathematics, philosophy,and even physics." This is present day problem or not to comparision of 1958 ? Because "discrete" and "continue" are very abstract notions, in future for concreteness we will talking about discrete and continue symmetries.Then we will see that problem solved or not.

In the Book P.Fraenkel, Yehoshua Bar-Hillel, FOUNDATIONS OF SET THEORY, North-Holland, 1958 you can read following : "The bridging of the chasm between the domains of the discrete and the continuous,or between arithmetic and geometry, is one of the most important - may, the most important - problem of the foundations of mathematics....Of course, the character of reasoning has changed, but,as always, the difficulties are due to the chasm between the discrete and the continuous - that permanent stumbling block which also plays an extremly important role in mathematics, philosophy,and even physics." This is present day problem or not to comparision of 1958 ?