Yuri Danoyan

Numerology is only interpretation. Science is extraction,mining of new facts. My facts are new.

Unless it is actually exactly 12, or you find a compelling reason why 12 is so significant, this is just numerology -- a thoroughly debunked and worthless... Why did you see only numerology? Great canadian scientist Hans Selye's favourite motto was : "Neither the prestige of your subject, and the power of your instruments, nor the extent of your learnedness and the precision of your planning, can substitute for the originality of your approach and the keeness of your observation." You are didn't see originality of my approach and the keeness of my observation.Only numerology? Unless it is actually exactly 12.... I revealed fluctuations around 12.It seems to me very important...

Additional information about wonderful N=12 see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/12_%28number%29

i am old admirer C. D. Froggatt, H. B. Nielsen idea Influence from the Future since arXiv.org > hep-ph > arXiv:hep-ph/9607375 Good luck!

The adjective NONCONFORMIST has 2 senses: 1. not conforming to some norm or socially approved pattern of behavior or thought 2. not conforming to established customs or doctrines especially in religion Does my approach in my threads is nonconformist?

I read in the book Concepts of Particle Physics voL.1 Kurt Gottfried and Wictor Weisskopf http://www.amazon.com/Concepts-Particle-Physics-I/dp/0195043731/ref=si3_rdr_bb_product P.167 about some intersting approach for problem of Gravity.It was about Gravity as a collective effect of Bose and Fermi fields. June 16 1998 i send mail to Kurt Gootfried for asking about supporter this approach.Dr.Gotfried call Andrei Sakharov's name.Why i like Sakharov idea? Because it very close to Metasymmetry: Fermions---antysymmetric wave function Bosons--symmetric wave function Fermions 10 или 01 Bosons 11 Metasymmetry 1011 или 1101 Ratio of unities vs zero is 3:1 See my post http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=34145 3. 3 from of the 4 fundamental interactions(strong,electromagnetic,weak ) are relativly closed by their intensity magnitude,but are much different from gravitational.Again 3:1 ratio.

http://blogs.chron.com/sciguy/archives/2008/01/the_states_most.html Different spelling casual

This is real exchange as well as all my correspndence with Frank Wilczek and Gerhard Hooft.See my other posts.

Andrei Linde: Lorentz invariance will be lost, i.e. space-time of special theory of relativity will loose its standard meaning. Yuri: If space is discrete and time- continue.... How about ds/dt ? Also become meaningless? Andrei: Why do you spend your time on weird ill defined concepts? Yuri: It is not weird question,because ds part of space;dt part of time. Because if used binary code for signify discrete and continue: ds/dt = 10/11 or 01/11 ,we get 2/3 or 1/3; look like charges of quarks;

I tried next calculating experiment with values of mass pseudoscalar long-lived{t>10^(-17)sec} mesons http://pdg.lbl.gov/2006/tables/contents_tables.html[/url] I divided values of mass long-lived mesons(LLM) to mass of proton Mp(938.27 Mev). Then interpreted a quotents as a inverse tangent and analised angles from tanfent.

Hi, I'm not familiar with the quote or its context, so I can only speculate. It might refer to "reduction" of the wave packet, with the idea that this might allow a fully symmetric initial or basic wave function to describe the universe as we observe it, which has reduced symmetry. All best wishes, Frank Wilczek May 27 2004 From Gerhard t'Hooft Pauli cannot have meant to say that continuous symmetry should not be examined. We should examine everything. What he meant may have been that in Nature one sees the tendency of symmetries to be reduced or even disappear. This could be caused by explicit forces or effects which simply aren't symmetric, such as the weak interaction causing transitions among particles that otherwise would be forbidden, but in more interesting cases it could be that, although all forces are symmetric, it is the asymmetric solutions of the equations that often dominate. Famous example is the Donkey of Buridan: it was given two identical haystacks, some distance apart. Since they were identical, the donkey could not choose, so it died of starvation. Of course, real donkeys will immediately choose one of the two and start eating, but whatever solution it takes, the solution will break the perfect symmetry between the two haystacks. Pauli probably meant that Nature is full of such Donkeys, choosing one haystack, no matter which, and breaking symmetries that way. This holds both for discrete and for continuous symmetries, so I don't think Pauli wanted to make any distinction there. G. 't H June 08 2004

Problem discrete/continue have solution if: 1.Concrete, as discrete symmetry/continue symmetry; 2.Minimal approximation used,binary notation; 3.Metasymmetry notion introduced; 4.To bring in an income as applications to physics; Azriel Levy only alive author abovementioned book.Resently i send him question "Does this quotation is valid today or not?" His answer to me: Dear Mr. Danoyan, No new edition of the book is planned. It is beteer for new authors to have their say. There is now less interest in foundations than, say, in a century or half a century ago. The advances in the technical directions isolated the purely foundational problems and they became less interesting to mathematicians. The people who still work on the foundatinal problems are the philosophers of mathematics, who may answer your question. Best regards, Azriel Levy Foundations of Set Theory (Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics) (Hardcover) by A.A. Fraenkel (Author), Y. Bar-Hillel (Author), A. Levy (Author) Quotation from Chapter IV,p.210-220.The abyss between discretenes and continuity. Other letters: Dear Dr Wilczek What Are You thinking about next quotation ? >> 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.(P.Fraenkel,Yehoshua Bar-Hillel, FOUNDATIONS OF SET > > THEORY,North-Holland,1958 Hi, I don't know how to rate it in importance, since I don't see any specific suggestion of a paradox or anomaly in Nature related to it, but it does bother me that the real number continuum, which is so fundamental to our present formulation of physics, is so complicated and apparently artificial when considered as a logical construction. All best wishes, Frank Wilczek February 08 2003 From Gerhard t'Hooft I don't perceive this as a chasm - or a stumbling block. Surely symmetry is playing a central role in physics, both discrete and continuous. Indeed, both kinds of symmetries are bewing used as tools to construct theories; gauge fields are fields whose equations can only be understood in their relation to local, continuous symmetries. In quantum mechanics, particle theory, condensed matter theory, superconductivity, symmetries are at the centre of our formalisms. I wouldn't call such an essential aspect of our theories a stumbling block. Cordially, G. 't Hooft June 09 2004

Dear Sir, It is true that one can distinguish discrete and continuous symmetries, but what you say about continuous symmetries does not make much sense to me. You talk about deformations like Lorentz contractions due to relativity, but, relativity itself is nothing but a continuous symmetry: that of the Lorentz transformations. All one has to do is ensure that a symmetry in question (say isospin symmetry, gauge symmetry or supersymmetry) is compatible with Lorentz symmetry, then there is no problem. Cordially, G. 't Hooft June 07 2004

it not for dummies

http://conjeturas.blogia.com/2005/mayo.php

angles..

From my imagination. If trigonometric tangent interval(0 to infinity) i try put proton mass as unit of universe?Then reveal where to go other particles. Result-interesting phenomenon 18 degrees The y-axis is the mass as compared to a proton? What is the significance of the tangent? Yes,just i try interpreting values of mass not ordinary way

But why are you ignoring Eta? I tried next calculating experiment with values of mass pseudoscalar long-lived{t>10^(-17)sec Eta life time less What are the axes? This is Trigonometric Tangent Functions Graph of y = tan(t) interval t(0-pi/2) 18 deg ; pi/10 I have some suspiction about conection pi/2 with Euler formula e^pii/2=1. My hypothesis: Time of Uinverse look like periodic trigonometric function y= tan(t) Picture show some nice pattern of evolution.

See my thread about space and time... http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=34427 Eventually we can speak about space separately from timeю

Dear Dr Weinberg If space is discrete and time is continue,4-dimensional space-time lost its sense ? Sincerely Yuri Danoyan Yes Stephen Weinberg

Just in case Evolution of Conway's 92 Look and Say audioactive elements http://www.btinternet.com/~se16/js/lands2.htm

From my imagination. If trigonometric tangent interval(0 to infinity) i try put proton mass as unit of universe?Then reveal where to go other particles. Result-interesting phenomenon 18 degrees

I try explaining it myself about 18 years ,but without success. The same when it tried famous scientist of the world.

Why can't you just explain it? Because i am not so smart....

Go to google search my name