Yuri Danoyan

but why are the mesons given a specific angle Mesons get these angles as a result of calculating experiment.. My question: "Why i got this symmetric result?" This is my own observation.

What are the axes? This is Trigonometric Tangent Functions Graph of y = tan(t) interval t(0-pi/2) 18 deg ; pi/10

Metasymmetry idea (to contrary "Division and reduction of symmetry") is addition of 2 symmetres(discrete and continue) to united symmetry,where there familiar facts of Nature. Somebody can asking: "Where are prediction new facts of Nature?" Russian scientists V.V.Belokurov and D.V.Shirkov in the book "Theory of Particles interactions"p.102 illustreted Higgs mechanism trivial: 2+2=1+3.This reference reminding me Metasymmetry idea. Discovery of Higgs my be confirm this approach?

I would be very grateful , if you could give me your interpretation of the phenomenon of 18 degrees.Some time it reminding me musical string where proton is major ton and mesones- overtones.

I now about it.Reference see my post http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=34145

Apparently nobody else is going to ask this so I will: what does "it from bit" mean? I guess you are not read John Wheeler's book "At Home in the Universe", nor the other "Geons, Black Holes & Quantum Foam."

As example for realization John Wheeler's idea "It from Bit" is Metasymmetry presented in thread "Discrete and Continue Symmetries" http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=34145 One more interesting example "It from Bit" 240 minimal vectors of the E8 root lattice.240 to binary 11110000.High rate antysmmetry John Wheeler was right.His "It from Bit" - fruiful ful idea .He deserved name Great Visionary of 20-century,which he get inter vivos.

The phenomenon of 18 degrees was found by me in 1990, I had an article published about it in the Russian journal "Tekhnika-molodeji" 1990,#12,p.22. The results seemed very interesting and enigmatic to me, but I couldn't find an explanation for them. I would be very grateful to you, if you could give me your interpretation of the phenomenon of 18 degrees.Some time it reminding me musical string where proton is major ton and mesones- overtones. 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: LLM m(Mev) tan^-1(m/Mp) pi+- 139,57 8.41(deg)=(45-37)deg pi0 134,97 8.13(deg)=(45-37)deg K+- 493 27.75(deg)=(45-18)deg K0 497 27.94(deg)=(45-18)deg ........................................................................ D+- 1869 63.34(deg)=(45+18)deg D0 1864 63.28(deg)=(45+18)deg D_s 1968 63.95(deg)=(45+18)deg B+- 5279 79.9(deg)=(45+35)deg B0 5279 79.9(deg)=(45+35)deg B* 5325 80.00(deg)=(45+35)deg Bs 5367 80.08(deg)=(45+35)deg B_s 5412 80.1(deg)=(45+35)deg B_c 6286 81.5(deg)=(45+36)deg Why long-lived mesons "like" 18 or 2X18=36 degrees? What is physical sense of 18 degrees ? What mean symmetry on the plot Y=tanX around proton when Mp=1 ? Really 18+/-1 degrees b.t.w. tan18 deg 30 min =1/3

Not yet confirmation for graviton "I like Bohr's division, because it allows the possibility that gravitons may not exist. If the scope of quantum theory is limited, gravity may legitimately be excluded from it"(Freeman Dyson) if you cut and ignore upper half If lower part not show properly real world,no trust to upper part.

This table from paper "Extended Supersymmetry And Extended Supergravity Theories" Joel Scherk (Ecole Normale Superieure) . LPTENS-78-21, Sep 1978. p.15. Invited talk given at NATO Advanced Study Inst. on Gravitation: Recent Developments, Cargese, France, Jul 10-29, 1978. Published in Cargese Summer Inst.1978:0479 (QC178:S77:1978) Drew attention to dark green rectangle. According Pauli's "Division and reduction of symmetry" ( http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=34142) if you cut and ignore upper half, you get: 3 particles with spin 1 and 1 particle with spin 1/2. But if you imagine inversion: 3 particles with spin 1/2 (proton,electron,neutrino) and 1 particle with spin 1 (photon) just agree with Nature. See my post: Discrete and Continue symmetries.http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=34145 My questions: Why disagreement between Theory and Expierence ? Why so unjust inversion?

I don't like empty philosophy! Pauli"s "Division and reduction of symmetry" approach demonsrated in thread Extended Supersymmetry And Extended Supergravity Theories. http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=34372

Thank you for attention!

They oscillate between states... You right,but all states are different manifestations the same particle.. Not Philosophy,only Mathematics.. Real metasymmetric numbers are #6(1101) and #7(1011) because other numbers senseless.Only these numbers repeat itch other if read in reverse order. Let see decimal numbers 13(#6) and 11(#7) .These numbers have intriguing features linking with physics. Let see metasymmetric decimal number 13 ( baker's dozen),dividing this record half and half and sum up we get 3 and 1; 3+1=4 D=4 dimension connected with ordinary space-time dimension.Multiplay 13x2=26 we get 26.26is important number for the string theory. Let see metasymmetric decimal number 11 . D=11 connected with M-theory.The same time fine structure constant 137 if sum up1+3+7=11; Binary 11 to decimal 3; This is schizophrenic link between 3 dimensions and 11 dimensions! If you look decimal 11 as a binary you get decimal 3.Crazy situation!

There are 8 versions of Metasymmetry(Ratio 3:1) 1)0001,2)0010,3)0100,4)1000,5)1110,6)1101,7)1011,8)0111 Which one number corresponding to Mother Nature? My be #6? Because division of symmetry(Prescription of Pauli) give as real 3:1 ratio.

heuristic A heuristic is a method to help solve a problem, commonly informal. It is particularly used for a method that often rapidly leads to a solution that is usually reasonably close to the best possible answer. Heuristics are "rules of thumb", educated guesses, intuitive judgments or simply common sense. Metasymmetry idea--heurustic idea.

I proposed other interpretation Pauli's phrase.See my thread. I invited read this book before for detail discussion.

I guess you are not read Werner Heisenberg book.After your reading we can talk about it. I think you did wrong accent,because more important analising content this book,than Goethe Faust. Werner Heisenberg Physics and Beyond: Encounters and Converstations (Harper & Row, 1971) p.234 and following pages

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,Professor for Theoretical Chemistry at ETH; Zuerich, Switzerland a explorer legacy of Pauli for more detail and get next letter from him: 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".

An argument can be made that they do relate. What do you think? I am afraid of difficulties to use notion "Time". John Wheeler's biographical book last chapter name "The End of Time,p.344".As David Gross say,because it doomed.I used only symmetry idea and some numerological trick in good sense. To my mind all surprises waiting us from revision common view to Time.

Lot of quotations from John Wheeler: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/j/john_a_wheeler.html I used only his idea"It from Bit" together with Wolfgang Pauli "Division and reduction of symmetry." To me only this synthesis can be applicable.

According to contemporary ideas the spin of elementary particle is a certain mysterious inner moment of impulse for which it is impossible a somewhat real physical picture to create. The absence of spin visual picture, in opinion of a number of authors leaves the regrettable gap in quantum mechanics interpretation. On the other hand, there are highly developed geometrical disciplines which are difficult to apply to specific physical theories owing to the fact that it is not always possible to point out the objects to which the geometrical notions could be corresponded.We point out to one interesting analogy which, in our view testifies to the geometrical interpretation of spin. Let's recall that according Pauli principle the two identical particles with half-integral spin (fermions) cannot be simultaneously in the same quantum state. The alternative of Pauli principle maintains that in one and the same quantum state any number of particles (bosons) with integral spin could be found (infinitely much in the limit). Thus, the two similar fermions can't be found in the same space point. For bosons the situation is quite different. The remarkable fact: when in one case in one and the same place of space one can't put more than one particle and in the other-infinitely much, which gives a hint that spin has a some-what geometrical sense. To speak in images the spin in one case creates very "tight", and in the other case - very "spacious" space. Why so? To this question we cannot now give an answer which speaks for necessity to find an answer in the geometrical notions. That's why we proceed to the geometry and study some facts reminding us the situation with fermions and bosons.It is well-known that besides the Euclidean geometry there are other geometrical systems (Lobachevsky, Riemannian geometry). According to Klein's interpretation, which is based on the projective geometry, the Euclidean, Lobachevsky and Riemannian geometry’s are in the unified scheme. The most known indication toidentify the latter two geometry is: in the Riemannian geometry(elliptical) across given point can't draw a straight line which couldn't cross the given straight line (analogy with the fermion)and in the Lobachevsky geometry (hyperbolic) across every point the infinite set of straight lines is passing, not intersecting with the given hyperbolic straight line (the analogy with bosons). The analogy yet proves nothing. But in this case this is the fact that requires close consideration, study and discussion.The suspicion arises that spin is the sign of elementary particle pointing out to its non-Euclidean nature. May be the zero curvature of our space develops from total positive and negative curvaturesof spaces created by fermions and bosons? Not this is a key tounderstand "the space-time foam", idea which was put forward by Wheeler and Hawking? Couldn't this approach help to solve the cosmological problems? Fermions---antysymmetric wave function Bosonы--symmetric wave function Elliptic--pozitive curvature(symmetric) Hyperbolic--negative curvature(antisymmetric) Summary: symmetry(mathematical)+antisymmetriy(physical) antisymmetry( mathematical)+symmetry(physical)

According to contemporary ideas the spin of elementary particle is a certain mysterious inner moment of impulse for which it is impossible a somewhat real physical picture to create. The absence of spin visual picture, in opinion of a number of authors leaves the regrettable gap in quantum mechanics interpretation. On the other hand, there are highly developed geometrical disciplines which are difficult to apply to specific physical theories owing to the fact that it is not always possible to point out the objects to which the geometrical notions could be corresponded.We point out to one interesting analogy which, in our view testifies to the geometrical interpretation of spin. Let's recall that according Pauli principle the two identical particles with half-integral spin (fermions) cannot be simultaneously in the same quantum state. The alternative of Pauli principle maintains that in one and the same quantum state any number of particles (bosons) with integral spin could be found (infinitely much in the limit). Thus, the two similar fermions can't be found in the same space point. For bosons the situation is quite different. The remarkable fact: when in one case in one and the same place of space one can't put more than one particle and in the other-infinitely much, which gives a hint that spin has a some-what geometrical sense. To speak in images the spin in one case creates very "tight", and in the other case - very "spacious" space. Why so? To this question we cannot now give an answer which speaks for necessity to find an answer in the geometrical notions. That's why we proceed to the geometry and study some facts reminding us the situation with fermions and bosons.It is well-known that besides the Euclidean geometry there are other geometrical systems (Lobachevsky, Riemannian geometry). According to Klein's interpretation, which is based on the projective geometry, the Euclidean, Lobachevsky and Riemannian geometry’s are in the unified scheme. The most known indication toidentify the latter two geometry is: in the Riemannian geometry(elliptical) across given point can't draw a straight line which couldn't cross the given straight line (analogy with the fermion)and in the Lobachevsky geometry (hyperbolic) across every point the infinite set of straight lines is passing, not intersecting with the given hyperbolic straight line (the analogy with bosons). The analogy yet proves nothing. But in this case this is the fact that requires close consideration, study and discussion.The suspicion arises that spin is the sign of elementary particle pointing out to its non-Euclidean nature. May be the zero curvature of our space develops from total positive and negative curvaturesof spaces created by fermions and bosons? Not this is a key tounderstand "the space-time foam", idea which was put forward by Wheeler and Hawking? Couldn't this approach help to solve the cosmological problems? Fermions---antysymmetric wave function Bosonы--symmetric wave function Elliptic--pozitive curvature(symmetric) Hyperbolic--negative curvature(antisymmetric) Summary: symmetry(mathematical)+antisymmetriy(physical) antisymmetry( mathematical)+symmetry(physical)

In this case discrete is a special case of continue. My version: continue is special case of discrete. In any case all solutions are approximations. My approximation continue symmetry by discrete binary very simple and euristic.... 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) "In Abstract Set Theory 1) the elements of the theory of sets were presented in a chiefly genetic way: the fundamental concepts were defined and..." (more) Key Phrases: quantifiers over class variables, intuitionistic attitude, relative selector, Second Axiom of Restriction http://www.amazon.com/Foundations-Theory-Studies-Logic-Mathematics/dp/0720422701/ref=si3_rdr_bb_product