SamBridge

Could it possibly be explained by the very slight curvature in space created by atoms?

I'd prefer evidence for ANY of them, there's no direct observable evidence for strings and it appears there is little to no direct evidence for super-symmetry.

I gave a my scenario and provided my measurements, if you doubt it then find a way to concentrate and control your rate heart in the manner I described and then test it yourself. Given the fact that even you yourself said there is limited control over your heart rate, what I am saying should not be much of a shocker, you have no reason to be hostile. I would to because I am pretty skeptical of stuff like this, but I definitely don't have any equipment to do that, or at least I don't have the chemistry skills to. But according to what I measure, it seems you can in fact not only slow your heart rate down to a limited extent at will, but keep it slowed down for an unknown duration of time that has yet to be tested. I'm not sure how unhealthy holding my heart-rate down for extended periods of time is as well as forcing it to slow down very fast, I don't know what effects it has if any and keeping it slowed down past a minimum point may cause slight brain damage, but so far I haven't been able to slow it to lower than 60 beats per minute so I shouldn't have to worry about that. 60 beats per minute by the way is y resting heart rate, perhaps there is some anatomical reason why it wouldn't slow down further than that while conscious.

"Along the same path" seems to imply that the photon would pass right through the electron without alteration, but light is obviously altered in non-vacuum states which is why it seems to take longer to reach a certain point in something like air even if it does not excite those particles.

Bye, good luck trying to come up with measurable evidence for string theory. Hopefully such an elegant solution is actually true.

As I understand on the macroscopic scale, light would bounce off at the same angle, but in the atomic scale, doesn't it stand that you cannot predict exactly which angle an electron will emit a photon at? So how exactly is the angle the same considering that?

Try it yourself, that's what I did.

try and make a more "quantitative" drawing.

Ok? Gluons have a small range even though they are mass-less, while W and Z bosons have a smaller range but do have mass which gives them drastically different properties. If you are trying to argue that either W or Z bosons are interchangeable with gluons you should provide evidence and then there's another gap with what the other boson corresponds to. Saying "its possible for a string to have a transformation to have a solution that corresponds to some boson" is hardly much. As the other hypothesis shows as well as you did there is predicted to be some kind of minimum energy or oscillation mode to cause coupling with higg's bosons upon the transformation. That's about it.

The definition of supersyemmetry is that all bosons have a corresponding fermions, which is used in string theory to describe particles as oscillation modes of dimensional strings which in some manners you attempted to describe by stating that a critical energy is needed for coupling with higgs particles every though you did not give a clear reason why those oscillation modes would cause coupling at the critical point. So if there is not a corresponding boson for every fermion it stands that super-symmetry has some faults or lacks a enough evidence.

I would have to say that that is not the result I got, the heart-rate was slowed down and instead of it speeding up for compensate for the oxygen needed it was merely similar to as if I held my breath, the heart rate did not have a dramatic increase afterwards, though perhaps part of it could have been the duration of time the test took place and that it was a natural amount of time for the heart-rate to lower to a point where it wouldn't necessarily need to rise dramatically.

So you mentioned the original string theory and said the topic was super-symmetry and now you want to talk about non-symmetry? Every boson should have a corresponding fermion, so what transformation and oscillation accounts for mass in W and Z bosons?

After I was done in that specific scenario which is not connected to the other scenario, after I started breathing again, I my muscles were fatigued and were damped in ability as well as a slight feeling of being light headed which was the same effect from the exp No I was already keeping track of it the whole time, on every account I attempted the experiment it worked, as for running fast I was able to hold the heart down after about 2 seconds of stopping the running which lead to the same effects described above as my heart-rate did not return to that previous rate.

But part of the reason why super-symmetry has faults is because of the details its missing as well as a lack of evidence, so how does super-symmetry and string theory account for the mass of W and Z bosons? W and Z bosons should have a counterpart according to supersymmetry.

I think perhaps gravity in a black hole you have a greater degree of curvature at it's surface, I remember there was equations to calculate the distortion in space to calculate time dilation that actually used trigonometric functions and approaching black holes they can warp past 360 degrees at some point, whereas a star may not, but can still have a greater range of high gravity.

So I know the common physics ax^2+bx+ or aT^2+VoT+X0 among its other various geometric uses, and I've seen a couple 4th degree polynomials in advanced particle physics, but where would you find something like X^9-2.3x^8-45x^5+23x^4+30 in nature? Or where would you find pseudo polynomials like x^(3/2)+1/2x^(1/2)-x^(-1/3)?

Well I would say the point of the answer "42" is that an answer to "life, the universe and everything" is meaningless none-sense, because the question also it, but I don't think that is what was trying to be conveyed.

I measured the time it took between heartbeats and found it was dramatically lower after a small period of time, there was other evidence for it such as oxygen depletion which makes sense, the same effect as if you hold your breath and exercise at the same time.

So how do you account for the mass of W and Z bosons then?

Aside from some of the assumptions lacking eidence, is this based on that black hole binary conjecture? There's absolutely no testing to confirm it and it wouldn't happen in more modern black hole physics, only the original Schwarzild physics which are outdated and don't work for all instances. What you're seeing actually isn't an object itself ever anyway, what you are seeing is the result of very complex neurological processes constructed by the brain and then after all that you perceive it however you perceive it. The statement" it takes 42 minutes to cross infinity" makes absolutely no sense.

The tissue paper will already have its ends falling at equal velocity otherwise the ends would tear off, at least in an ideal situation but there's air resistance of course and you'd need some kind of computer to model how the complex folds in air would warp it as it fell. If you were on the moon however it would just automatically fall flat with all the parts falling at equal acceleration.

I can't remember how to do it exactly but you have to use some kind of average value integral based on it's dimensional properties of how they change, I think elf is pretty close if not right on it. Normally its the integral of a to b and the integrand of which is divided by b-a and you somehow us the coordinate of x=average value and f(average value), but I don't know how you find the exact coordinate.

Oscillation modes on their own aren't responsible for coupling with higg's bosons which you can see if you look at massless particles, you should explain what your intent is with the diagrams. You are trying to use vectors of the string in a higg's field to represent the direction of oscillation to explain the critical potential necessary for coupling? Or...what...

The start was leading into a good one but if I did not have the answer ringer posted I would be rather unsatisfied.

Imaginary numbers can easily arise from trigonometric functions such as the similar ones used in particle physics or just finding roots, what's your point? If a string's mass was increasing and it increased its energy state it wouldn't have the same oscillation mode which would make your diagram inaccurate. It does seem like it would help explaine the imaginary mass, but I don't see an apparent reason why it explains that the W and Z bosons can have mass independent from that, the coupling only applies to fermions.