Article Index

3. The Instanton


3.1 Bosonic Unification S.EW.G --- S.E.W.G


The following derivations lead to a simplified string formalism as boundary- and initial conditions in a de Sitter cosmology encompassing the classical Minkowski-Friedmann spacetimes holographically and fractally in the Schwarzschild metrics.


The magnetic field intensity B is classically described in the Biot-Savart Law:
B=μoqv/4πr2oi/4πr=μoqω/4πr=μoNef/2r
for a charge count q=Ne; angular velocity ω=v/r=2πf; current i=dq/dt and the current element i.dl=dq.(dl/dt)=vdq.

The Maxwell constant then can be written as an (approximating) finestructure:
μoεo =1/c2=(120π/c)(1/120πc) to crystallise the 'free space impedance' Zo=√(μoo)=120π~377 Ohm (Ω).

This vacuum resistance Zo so defines a 'Unified Action Law' in a coupling of the electric permittivity component (εo) of inertial mass and the magnetic permeability component (μo) of gravitational mass in the Equivalence Principle of General Relativity.
A unified selfstate of the preinertial (string- or brane) cosmology so is obtained from the finestructures for the electric- and gravitational interactions coupling a so defined electropolic mass to magnetopolic mass respectively.

The Planck-Mass is given from Unity 1=2πGmP2/hc and the Planck-Charge derives from Alpha=2πke2/hc and where k=1/4πεo in the electromagnetic finestructure describing the probability interaction between matter and light (as about 1/137).

The important aspect of alpha relates to the inertia coupling of Planck-Charge to Planck-Mass as all inertial masses are associated with Coulombic charges as inertial electropoles; whilst the stringed form of the Planck-Mass remains massless as gravitational mass. It is the acceleration of electropoles coupled to inertial mass, which produces electromagnetic radiation (EMR); whilst the analogy of accelerating magnetopoles coupled to gravitational mass and emitting electromagnetic monopolic radiation (EMMR) remains hitherto undefined in the standard models of both cosmology and particle physics.

But the coupling between electropoles and magnetopoles occurs as dimensional intersection, say between a flat Minkowskian spacetime in 4D and a curved de Sitter spacetime in 5D (and which becomes topologically extended in 6-dimensional Calabi-Yau tori and 7-dimensional Joyce manifolds in M-Theory).

The formal coupling results in the 'bounce' of the Planck-Length in the pre-Big Bang scenario, and which manifests in the de Broglie inflaton-instanton.

The Planck-Length LP=√(hG/2πc3) 'oscillates' in its Planck-Energy mP=h/λPc=h/2πcLP to give √Alpha).LP=e/c2 in the coupling of 'Stoney units' suppressing Planck's constant 'h' to the 'Planck units' suppressing charge quantum 'e'.

Subsequently, the Planck-Length is 'displaced' in a factor of about 11.7=1/√Alpha=√(h/60π)/e and using the Maxwellian finestructures and the unity condition kG=1 for a dimensionless string coupling Go=4πεo, describing the 'Action Law' for the Vacuum Impedance as Action=Charge2, say via dimensional analysis:

Zo=√([Js2/C2m]/[C2/Jm])=[Js]/[C2]=[Action/Charge2] in Ohms [Ω=V/I=Js/C2] and proportional to [h/e2] as the 'higher dimensional source' for the manifesting superconductivity of the lower dimensions in the Quantum Hall Effect (~e2/h), the conductance quantum (2e2/h) and the Josephson frequencies (~2e/h) in Ohms [Ω].

This derivation so indicates an electromagnetic cosmology based on string parameters as preceding the introduction of inertial mass (in the quantum Big Bang) and defines an intrinsic curvature within the higher dimensional (de Sitter) universe based on gravitational mass equivalents and their superconductive monopolic current flows.

A massless, but monopolically electromagnetic de Sitter universe would exhibit intrinsic curvature in gravitational mass equivalence in its property of closure under an encompassing static Schwarzschild metric and a Gravitational String-Constant Go=1/k=1/30c (as given in the Maxwellian finestructures in the string space).

In other words, the Big Bang manifested inertial parameters and the matter content for a subsequent cosmoevolution in the transformation of gravitational 'curvature energy', here called gravita as precursor for inertia into inertial mass seedlings; both however describable in Black Hole physics and the Schwarzschild metrics.

The Gravitational Finestructure so derives in replacing the Planck-Mass mP by a protonucleonic mass:

mc=√(hc/2πGo).f(alpha)= f(Alpha).mP and where f(Alpha)=Alpha9.
The Gravitational finestructure, here named Omega, is further described in a fivefolded supersymmetry of the string hierarchies, the latter as indicated in the following below in excerpt.

This pentagonal supersymmetry can be expressed in a number of ways, say in a one-to-one mapping of the Alpha finestructure constant as invariant X from the Euler Identity:

X+Y=XY= -1=i2=exp(iπ).

One can write a Unification Polynomial: (1-X)(X)(1+X)(2+X)=1 or X4+2X3-X2-2X+1=0
to find the coupling ratios: f(S)¦f(E)¦f(W)¦f(G)=#¦#3¦#18¦#54 from the proportionality
#¦#3¦{[(#3)2]}3¦({[(#3)2]}3)3=Cuberoot(Alpha):Alpha:Cuberoot(Omega):Omega.

The Unification polynomial then sets the ratios in the inversion properties under modular duality:

(1)[Strong short]¦(X)[Electromagnetic long]¦(X2)[Weak short]¦(X3)[Gravitational long]
as 1¦X¦X2¦X3 = (1-X)¦(X)¦(1+X)¦(2+X).

Unity 1 maps as (1-X) transforming as f(S) in the equality (1-X)=X2; X maps as invariant of f(E) in the equality (X)=(X); X2 maps as (1+X) transforming as f(W) in the equality (1+X)=1/X; and X3 maps as (2+X) transforming as f(G) in the equality (2+X)=1/X2=1/(1-X).

The mathematical pentagonal supersymmetry from the above then indicates the physicalised T-duality of M-theory in the principle of mirror-symmetry and which manifests in the reflection properties of the heterotic string classes HO(32) and HE(64), described further in the following.

Defining f(S)=#=1/f(G) and f(E)=#2.f(S) then describes a symmetry breaking between the 'strong S' f(S) interaction and the 'electromagnetic E' f(E) interaction under the unification couplings.
This couples under modular duality to f(S).f(G)=1=#55 in a factor #-53=f(S)/f(G)={f(S)}2 of the 'broken' symmetry between the longrange- and the shortrange interactions.

SEWG=1=Strong-Electromagnetic-Weak-Gravitational as the unified supersymmetric identity then decouples in the manifestation of string-classes in the de Broglie 'matter wave' epoch termed inflation and preceding the Big Bang, the latter manifesting at Weyl-Time as a string-transformed Planck-Time as the heterotic HE(64) class.

As SEWG indicates the Planck-String (class I, which is both openended and closed), the first transformation becomes the suppression of the nuclear interactions sEwG and describing the selfdual monopole (stringclass IIB, which is loop-closed in Dirichlet brane attachement across dimensions say Kaluza-Klein R5 to Minkowski R4 or Membrane-Space R11 to String Space R10).

The monopole class so 'unifies' E with G via the gravitational finestructure assuming not a Weylian fermionic nucleon, but the bosonic monopole from the kGo=1 initial-boundary condition GmM2= ke2 for mM=ke=30[ec]=mP√Alpha.

The Planck-Monopole coupling so becomes mP/mM=mP/30[ec]=1/√Alpha
with f(S)=f(E)/#2 modulating f(G)=#2/f(E)=1/# ↔ f(G){f(S)/f(G)}=# in the symmetry breaking f(S)/f(G)=1/#53 between short (nuclear asymptotic) and long (inverse square).

The shortrange coupling becomes f(S)/f(W)=#/#18=1/#17=Cuberoot(Alpha)/Alpha6
and the longrange coupling is Alpha/Omega=1/Alpha17=#3/#54=1/#51=1/(#17)3.

The strong nuclear interaction coupling parameter so becomes about 0.2 as the cuberoot of alpha and as measured in the standard model of particle physics.

The monopole quasimass [ec] describes a monopolic sourcecurrent ef, manifesting for a displacement λ=c/f. This is of course the GUT unification energy of the Dirac Monopole at precisely [c3] eV or 2.7x1016 GeV and the upper limit for the Cosmic Ray spectra as the physical manifestation for the string classes: {I, IIB, HO(32), IIA and HE(64) in order of modular duality transmutation}.

The transformation of the Monopole string into the XL-Boson string decouples Gravity from sEwG in sEw.G in the heterotic superstring class HO(32). As this heterotic class is modular dual to the other heterotic class HE(64), it is here, that the protonucleon mass is defined in the modular duality of the heterosis in: Omega=Alpha18=2πGomc2/hc=(mc/mP)2.

The HO(32) string bifurcates into a quarkian X-part and a leptonic L-part, so rendering the bosonic scalar spin as fermionic halfspin in the continuation of the 'breaking' of the supersymmetry of the Planckian unification. Its heterosis with the Weyl-string then decouples the strong interaction at Weyl-Time for a Weyl-Mass mW, meaning at the timeinstanton of the end of inflation or the Big Bang in sEw.G becoming s.Ew.G.

The X-Boson then transforms into a fermionic protonucleon triquark-component (of energy ~ 10-27 kg or 560 MeV) and the L-Boson transforms into the protomuon (of energy about 111 MeV).

The last 'electroweak' decoupling then occurs at the Fermi-Expectation Energy about 1/365 seconds after the Big Bang at a temperature of about 3.4x1015 K and at a 'Higgs Boson' energy of about 298 GeV.

A Bosonic decoupling preceeded the electroweak decoupling about 2 nanoseconds into the cosmogenesis at the Weyl-temperature of so TWeyl=Tmax=EWeyl/k=1.4x1020 K as the maximum Black Hole temperature maximised in the Hawking MT modulus and the Hawking-Gibbons formulation: McriticalTmin=½MPlanckTPlanck=(hc/2πGo)(c2/2k)=hc3/4πkGo for Tmin=1.4x10-29 K and Boltzmann constant k.

The Hawking Radiation formula results in the scaling of the Hawking MT modulus by the factor of the 'Unified Field' spanning a displacement scale of 8p radians or 1440° in the displacement of 4lps.

The XL-Boson mass is given in the quark-component: mX=#3mW/[ec]=Alpha.mW/mP=#3{mW/mP}~1.9x1015 GeV; and the lepton-component: mL=Omega.[ec]/#2=#52[ec/mW] ~ 111 MeV.

A reformulation of the rotational dynamics associated with the monopolic naturally superconductive currentflow and the fractalisation of the static Schwarzschild solution follows. in a reinterpretation of the Biot-Savart Law.

All inertial objects are massless as 'Strominger branes' or extremal boundary Black Hole equivalents and as such obey the static and basic Schwarzschild metric as gravita template for inertia.

This also crystallises the Sarkar Black Hole boundary as the 100Mpc limit (RSarkar=(Mo/Mcritical.RHubble)=0.028.RHubble~237 Million lightyears) for the cosmological principle, describing large scale homogeneity and isotropy, in the supercluster scale as the direct 'descendants' of Daughter Black Holes from the Universal Mother Black Hole describing the Hubble Horizon as the de Sitter envelope for the Friedmann cosmology (see linked website references on de Sitter cosmology) for the oscillatory universe bounded in the Hubble nodes as a standing waveform.

The Biot-Savart Law: B=μoqv/4πr2oi/4πr=μoNef/2r=μoNeω/4πr for angular velocity ω=v/r transforms into B=constant(e/c3)gxω

in using acentripetal=v2/r=rω2 for g=GM/r2=(2GM/c2)(c2/2r2)=(RSc2/2R2) for a Schwarzschild solution RS=2GM/c2.

B=constant(eω/rc)(v/c)2oNeω/4πr yields constant=μoNc/4π=(120πN/4π)=30N with e=mM/30c for
30N(eω/c3)(GM/R2)=30N(mM/30c)ω(2GM/c2)/(2cR2)=NmM(ω/2c2R)(RS/R)= {M}ω/2c2R.

Subsequently, B=Mw/2c2R = NmM(RS/R){ω/2c2R} to give a manifesting mass M finestructured in
M=NmM(RS/R) for N=2n in the superconductive 'Cooper-Pairings' for a charge count q=Ne=2ne.

But any mass M has a Schwarzschild radius RS for N=(M/mM){R/RS}=(M/mM){Rc2/2GM}={Rc2/2GmM}={R/RM} for a monopolic Schwarzschild radius RM=2GmM/c2=2G(30ec)/c2=60ec/30c3=2e/c2=2LP√Alpha=2OLP.

Any mass M is quantised in the Monopole mass mM=mP√Alpha in its Schwarzschild metric and where the characterising monopolic Schwarzschild radius represents the minimum metric displacement scale as the Oscillation of the Planck-Length in the form 2LP√Alpha~LP/5.85.

This relates directly to the manifestation of the magnetopole in the lower dimensions, say in Minkowski spacetime in the coupling of inertia to Coulombic charges, that is the electropole and resulting in the creation of the mass-associated electromagnetic fields bounded in the c-invariance.
From the Planck-Length Oscillation or 'LP-bounce': OLP=LP√Alpha=e/c2 in the higher (collapsed or enfolded) string dimensions, the electropole e=OLP.c2 maps the magnetopole e*=2Re.c2 as 'inverse source energy' EWeyl=hfWeyl and as function of the classical electron radius Re =ke2/mec2=RCompton.Alpha= RBohr1.Alpha2=Alpha3/4πRRydberg= 1010{2πRW/360}={e*/2e}.OLP.

The resulting reflection-mirror space of the M-Membrane space (in 11D) so manifests the 'higher D' magnetocharge 'e*' AS INERTIAL MASS in the monopolic current [ec], that is the electropolic Coulomb charge 'e'.
This M-space becomes then mathematically formulated in the gauge symmetry of the algebraic Lie group E8 and which generates the inertial parameters of the classical Big Bang in the Weylian limits and as the final Planck-String transformation.

The string-parametric Biot-Savart law then relates the angular momentum of any inertial object of mass M with angular velocity ω in selfinducing a magnetic flux intensity given by B=Mω/2Rc2 and where the magnetic flux relates inversely to a displacement R from the center of rotation and as a leading term approximation for applicable perturbation series.

This descriptor of a string based cosmology so relates the inherent pentagonal supersymmetry in the cosmogenesis to the definition of the Euler identity in its finestructure X+Y=XY=-1, and a resulting quadratic with roots the Golden Mean and the Golden Ratio of the ancient omniscience of harmonics, inclusive of the five Platonic solids mapping the five superstring classes. Foundations and applications of superstring theory are also indicated and serve as reference for the above.


 

 

 

3.2 Baryogenesis without Antimatter

 

 

Matter-Antimatter Asymmetry: CERN Experiments On Particles Containing Charm Quark Fail To Detect CP Violation

By Avaneesh Pandey @avaneeshp88 On 09/29/16 AT 7:12 AM

cern-lhc.PNG
A view of the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN. Photo: CERN

Why is there something rather than nothing? This is a question that has, for the longest time, perplexed physicists.
If our current understanding of the universe is correct, it should not even exist. The very fact that planets, stars and galaxies exist undercuts one of the most fundamental premises of particle physics — that the Big Bang, which created our universe 13.8 billion years ago, created equal amounts of matter and antimatter.
If this really happened, why, given that matter and antimatter particles annihilate each other when they collide, does anything exist at all? Why do you and I exist when the laws of physics, as we know them, seem to dictate that the cosmos should be nothing but a wasteland strewn with leftover energy?
Obviously, as attested by the fact that we exist, there is a fundamental difference between matter and antimatter. Either significantly more matter was created by the Big Bang, or there is a fundamental, as-of-yet-undiscovered asymmetry between matter particles and their antimatter counterparts — one that would have given the former an edge over the latter in the race for survival.

The quest to discover this asymmetry is a goal that has witnessed the involvement of several particle physicists from across the world, including researchers at the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) — the institution that houses the world’s most powerful particle collider.
On Wednesday, researchers associated with the LHCb experiment at the Large Hadron Collider announced that they had made the most precise measurement of Charge-Parity (CP) violation among particles containing a charm quark.
Quarks, the fundamental particles that make up protons and neutrons, come in six different “flavors” — up, down, strange, top, bottom and charm. Each quark has an antimatter equivalent known as antiquark. Both protons and neutrons — contained within the nucleus of an atom — are made up of three quarks bound together.
Related Stories

The Standard Model of particle physics, which describes how three of the four known fundamental forces work, has a central tenet — charge-parity symmetry, which posits that the laws of physics remain unchanged even if a particle is replaced with its antiparticle, which has the opposite charge, and if its spatial coordinates are inverted.
If a significant violation of CP symmetry is detected, it would not only hint at the existence of physics beyond the Standard Model, it would also help us understand why the universe is completely devoid of antimatter.

So far, however, the extent of CP violation detected among elementary particles is not significant enough to explain the observed matter-antimatter asymmetry — something that was further confirmed by the precise measurements carried out by LHCb researchers.
“The LHCb collaboration made a precise comparison between the decay lifetime of a particle called a D0meson (formed by a charm quark and an up antiquark) and its anti-matter counterpart D0 (formed by an charm antiquark and up quark), when decaying either to a pair of pions or a pair of kaons. Any difference in these lifetimes would provide strong evidence that an additional source of CP violation is at work,” CERN said in the statement. “The latest results indicate that the lifetimes of the D0 and D0 particles, measured using their decays to pions or kaons, are still consistent, thereby demonstrating that any CP violation effect that is present must indeed be at a tiny level.”

baryogenesis.

There is no CP-violation in any quark whose constituents are up-quarks and anti-up quarks, as is the case for the charm quarks c-uu[bar]u and c[bar]=u[bar]uu[bar], as the CP violation requires Inner-Ring (down-antidown) or Outer-Ring (strange-antistrange) interaction.

ufoqrpdf.

The Top-Super Diquark Resonance of CERN - December 15th, 2015

As can be calculated from the table entries below; a Top-Super Diquark Resonance is predicted as a (ds)bar(ss)=(ds)barS or a (ds)(ss)bar=(ds)Sbar diquark complex averaged at (182.758+596.907)GeV=779.67 GeV.
atlas_cms_diphoton_2015--31707-.31710.

In the diquark triplet {dd; ds; ss}={Dainty; Top; Super} a Super-Superbar resonance at 1.194 TeV can also be inferred with the Super-Dainty resonance at 652.9 GeV and the Top-Dainty resonance at 238.7 GeV 'suppressed' by the Higgs Boson summation as indicated below. Supersymmetric partners become unnecessary in the Standard Model, extended into the diquark hierarchies.

Ten DIQUARK quark-mass-levels crystallise, including a VPE-level for the K-IR transition and a VPE-level for the IR-OR transition:

VPE-Level [K-IR] is (26.4922-29.9621 MeV*) for K-Mean: (14.11358 MeV*); (2.8181-3.1872 MeV*) for IROR;
VPE-Level [IR-OR] is (86.5263-97.8594 MeV*) for K-Mean: (46.09643 MeV*); (9.2042-10.410 MeV*) for IROR;
UP/DOWN-Level is (282.5263-319.619 MeV*) for K-Mean: (150.5558 MeV*); (30.062-33.999 MeV*) for IROR;
STRANGE-Level is (923.013-1,043.91 MeV*) for K-Mean: (491.7308 MeV*); (98.185-111.05 MeV*) for IROR;
CHARM-Level is (3,014.66-3,409.51 MeV*) for K-Mean: (1,606.043 MeV*); (320.68-362.69 MeV*) for IROR;
BEAUTY-Level is (9,846.18-11,135.8 MeV*) for K-Mean: (5,245.495 MeV*); (1,047.4-1,184.6 MeV*) for IROR;
MAGIC-Level is (32,158.6-36,370.7 MeV*) for K-Mean: (17,132.33 MeV*); (3,420.9-3,868.9 MeV*) for IROR;
DAINTY-Level is (105,033-118,791 MeV*) for K-Mean: (55,956.0 MeV*); (11,173-12,636 MeV*) for IROR;
TRUTH-Level is (343,050-387,982 MeV*) for K-Mean: (182,758.0 MeV*); (36,492-41,271 MeV*) for IROR;
SUPER-Level is (1,120,437-1,267,190 MeV*) for K-Mean: (596,906.8 MeV*); (119,186-134,797 MeV*) for IROR.

The K-Means define individual materialising families of elementary particles;

the (UP/DOWN-Mean) sets the (PION-FAMILY: po, p+, p-);
the (STRANGE-Mean) specifies the (KAON-FAMILY: Ko, K+, K-);
the (CHARM-Mean) defines the (J/PSI=J/Y-Charmonium-FAMILY);
the (BEAUTY-Mean) sets the (UPSILON=U-Bottonium-FAMILY);
the (MAGIC-Mean) specifies the (EPSILON=E-FAMILY);
the (DAINTY-Mean) bases the (OMICRON-O-FAMILY);
the (TRUTH-Mean) sets the (KOPPA=J-Topomium-FAMILY) and
the (SUPER-Mean) defines the final quark state in the (HIGGS/CHI=H/C-FAMILY).

The VPE-Means are indicators for average effective quarkmasses found in particular interactions.
Kernel-K-mixing of the wavefunctions gives K(+)=60.210 MeV* and K(-)=31.983 MeV* and the IROR-Ring-Mixing gives (L(+)=6.405 MeV* and L(-)=3.402 MeV*) for a (L-K-Mean of 1.50133 MeV*) and a (L-IROR-Mean of 4.90349 MeV*); the Electropole ([e-]=0.52049 MeV*) as the effective electronmass and as determined from the electronic radius and the magnetocharge in the UFoQR.

The restmasses for the elementary particles can now be constructed, using the basic nucleonic restmass (mc=9.9247245x10-28 kg*=(Squareroot of [Omega]xmP) and setting (mc) as the basic maximum (UP/DOWN-K-mass=mass(KERNEL CORE)=3xmass(KKK)=3x319.62 MeV*=958.857 MeV*);
Subtracting the (Ring VPE 3xL(+)=19.215 MeV*, one gets the basic nucleonic K-state for the atomic nucleus (made from protons and neutrons) in: {m(n0;p+)=939.642 MeV*}.


The HB discussed in the New Scientist post below is said of having been measured in the decay of W's, Z's and Tau Leptons, as well as the bottom- and top-quark systems described in the table and the text above.

Now in the table I write about the KIR-OR transitions and such. The K means core for kernel and the IR means InnerRing and the OR mean OuterRing. The Rings are all to do with Leptons and the Kernels with Quarks.

So the Tau-decay relates to 'Rings' which are charmed and strange and bottomised and topped, say. They are higher energy manifestations of the basic nucleons of the proton and the neutrons and basic mesons and hyperons.


Is This the Beginning of the End of the Standard Model?

Posted on December 16, 2015 | 15 Comments
Was yesterday the day when a crack appeared in the Standard Model that will lead to its demise? Maybe. It was a very interesting day, that’s for sure. [Here’s yesterday’s article on the results as they appeared.]
I find the following plot useful… it shows the results on photon pairs from ATLAS and CMS superposed for comparison. [I take only the central events from CMS because the events that have a photon in the endcap don’t show much (there are excesses and deficits in the interesting region) and because it makes the plot too cluttered; suffice it to say that the endcap photons show nothing unusual.] The challenge is that ATLAS uses a linear horizontal axis while CMS uses a logarithmic one, but in the interesting region of 600-800 GeV you can more or less line them up. Notice that CMS’s bins are narrower than ATLAS’s by a factor of 2.
atlas_cms_diphoton_2015-.31707.
The diphoton results from ATLAS (top) and CMS (bottom) arranged so that the 600, 700 and 800 GeV locations (blue vertical lines) line up almost perfectly. (The plots do not line up away from this region!) The data are the black dots (ignore the bottom section of CMS’s plot for now.) Notice that the obvious bumps in the two data sets appear in more or less the same place. The bump in ATLAS’s data is both higher (more statistically significant) and significantly wider.


Both plots definitely show a bump. The two experiments have rather similar amounts of data, so we might have hoped for something more similar in the bumps, but the number of events in each bump is small and statistical flukes can play all sorts of tricks.
Of course your eye can play tricks too. A bump of a low significance with a small number of events looks much more impressive on a logarithmic plot than a bump of equal significance with a larger number of events — so beware that bias, which makes the curves to the left of the bump appear smoother and more featureless than they actually are. [For instance, in the lower register of CMS’s plot, notice the bump around 350.]

We’re in that interesting moment when all we can say is that there might be something real and new in this data, and we have to take it very seriously. We also have to take the statistical analyses of these bumps seriously, and they’re not as promising as these bumps look by eye. If I hadn’t seen the statistical significances that ATLAS and CMS quoted, I’d have been more optimistic.

Also disappointing is that ATLAS’s new search is not very different from their Run 1 search of the same type, and only uses 3.2 inverse femtobarns of data, less than the 3.5 that they can use in a few other cases… and CMS uses 2.6 inverse femtobarns. So this makes ATLAS less sensitive and CMS more sensitive than I was originally estimating… and makes it even less clear why ATLAS would be more sensitive in Run 2 to this signal than they were in Run 1, given the small amount of Run 2 data. [One can check that if the events really have 750 GeV of energy and come from gluon collisions, the sensitivity of the Run 1 and Run 2 searches are comparable, so one should consider combining them, which would reduce the significance of the ATLAS excess. Not to combine them is to “cherry pick”.]

By the way, we heard that the excess events do not look very different from the events seen on either side of the bump; they don’t, for instance, have much higher total energy. That means that a higher-energy process, one that produces a new particle at 750 GeV indirectly, can’t be a cause of big jump in the 13 TeV production rate relative to 8 TeV. So one can’t hide behind this possible explanation for why a putative signal is seen brightly in Run 2 and was barely seen, if at all, in Run 1.
Of course the number of events is small and so these oddities could just be due to statistical flukes doing funny things with a real signal. The question is whether it could just be statistical flukes doing funny things with the known background, which also has a small number of events.
And we should also, in tempering our enthusiasm, remember this plot: the diboson excess that so many were excited about this summer. Bumps often appear, and they usually go away. R.I.P.
atlas_dibosonxs-.31708.
The most dramatic of the excesses in the production of two W or Z bosons from Run 1 data, as seen in ATLAS work published earlier this year. That bump excited a lot of people. But it doesn’t appear to be supported by Run 2 data. A cautionary tale.

Nevertheless, there’s nothing about this diphoton excess which makes it obvious that one should be pessimistic about it. It’s inconclusive: depending on the statistical questions you ask (whether you combine ATLAS and CMS Run 2, whether you try to combine ATLAS Run 1 and Run 2, whether you worry about whether the resonance is wide or narrow), you can draw positive or agnostic conclusions. It’s hard to draw entirely negative conclusions… and that’s a reason for optimism.

Six months or so from now — or less, if we can use this excess as a clue to find something more convincing within the existing data — we’ll likely say “R.I.P.” again. Will we bury this little excess, or the Standard Model itself?

http://profmattstrassler.com/2015/12/16/is-this-the-beginning-of-the-end-of-the-standard-model/

Hints of Higgs Boson at 125 GeV Are Found:
Congratulations to All the People at LHC!
cover_issue_23_en_us--16765-.31709.



Refined Higgs Rumours, Higgs Boson Live Blog: Analysis of the CERN Announcement, Has CERN Found the God Particle? A Calculation, Electron Spin Precession for the Time Fractional Pauli Equation, Plane Wave Solutions of Weakened Field Equations in a Plane Symmetric Space-time-II, Plane Wave Solutions of Field Equations of Israel and Trollope's Unified Field Theory in V5, If the LHC Particle Is Real, What Is One of the Other Possibilities than the Higgs Boson? What is Reality in a Holographic World? Searching for Earth’s Twin.

Editor: Huping HU, Ph.D., J.D.; Editor-at-Large: Philip E. Gibbs, Ph.D.

ISSN: 2153-8301

Dear Huping!

The Higgs Boson resonance, found by ATLAS and CMS is a diquark resonance.

Excerpt:

"Ok, now I'll print some excerpt for the more technically inclined reader regarding the Higgs Boson and its 'make-up', but highlight the important relevant bit (wrt to this discovery of a 160 GeV Higgs Boson energy, and incorporating the lower energy between 92 GeV and to the upper dainty level at 130 GeV as part of the diquark triplet of the associated topomium energy level) at the end.

In particular, as the bottomium doublet minimum is at 5,245.495 MeV* and the topomium triplet minimum is at 55,956.0 MeV* in terms of their characteristic Kernel-Means, their doubled sum indicates a particle-decay excess at the recently publisized ~125 GeV energy level in 2x(5.246+55.956) GeV* = 122.404 GeV* (or 122.102 GeV SI).
These are the two means from ATLAS {116-130 GeV as 123 GeV} and CMS {115-127 GeV as 121 GeV} respectively.

http://press.web.cern.ch/press/PressReleases/Releases2011/PR25.11E.html

Then extending the minimum energy levels, like as in the case to calculate the charged weakon gauge field agent energy in the charm and the VPE perturbations as per the table given, specifies the 125 GeV energy level in the Perturbation Integral/Summation:

2x{55.956+5.246+1.606+0.491+0.151+0.046+0.014} GeV* = 127.02 GeV*, which become about 126.71 GeV SI as an UPPER LIMIT for this 'Higgs Boson' at the Dainty quark resonance level from the Thuban Dragon Omni-Science.
Using the 3 Diquark energy levels U,D and S yield 2x{55.956+5.246+1.606} GeV* = 125.62 GeV* and 125.31 GeV SI.""




This newest data/discovery about the Higgs Boson aka the 'God-Particle' states, that there seems to be a 'resonance-blip' at an energy of about 160 GeV and as just one of say 5 Higgs Bosons for a 'minimal supersymmetry'.
One, the lowest form of the Higgs Boson is said to be about 110 GeV in the Standard Model. There is also a convergence of the HB to an energy level of so 120 GeV from some other models.
Now the whole thing , according to Quantum Relativity' about the Higgs Boson, is that IT IS NOT a particular particle, but relates to ALL particles in its 'scalar nature' as a restmass inducer.

I have discussed the Higgs Boson many times before; but would like here to show in a very simple analysis that the Higgs Boson MUST show a blip at the 160 GeV mark and due to its nature as a 'polarity' neutraliser (a scalar particle has no charge and no spin, but can be made up of two opposite electric charges and say two opposing chiralities of spin orientations.)

Without worrying about details, first consider the following table which contains all the elementary particles of the standard model of particle physics. The details are found in the Planck-String transformations discussed elesewhere.

The X-Boson's mass is: ([Alpha]xmps/[ec]) modulated in (SNI/EMI={Cuberoot of [Alpha]}/[Alpha]), the intrisic unified Interaction-Strength and as the L-Boson's mass in: ([Omega]x([ec])/(mpsxa<2/3>), where the (Cuberoot of [Alpha]2 is given by the symbol (a<2/3>)=EMI/SNI).

Ten DIQUARK quark-mass-levels crystallise, including a VPE-level for the K-IR transition and a VPE-level for the IR-OR transition:

VPE-Level [K-IR] is (26.4922-29.9621 MeV*) for K-Mean: (14.11358 MeV*); (2.8181-3.1872 MeV*) for IROR;
VPE-Level [IR-OR] is (86.5263-97.8594 MeV*) for K-Mean: (46.09643 MeV*); (9.2042-10.410 MeV*) for IROR;
UP/DOWN-Level is (282.5263-319.619 MeV*) for K-Mean: (150.5558 MeV*); (30.062-33.999 MeV*) for IROR;
STRANGE-Level is (923.013-1,043.91 MeV*) for K-Mean: (491.7308 MeV*); (98.185-111.05 MeV*) for IROR;
CHARM-Level is (3,014.66-3,409.51 MeV*) for K-Mean: (1,606.043 MeV*); (320.68-362.69 MeV*) for IROR;
BEAUTY-Level is (9,846.18-11,135.8 MeV*) for K-Mean: (5,245.495 MeV*); (1,047.4-1,184.6 MeV*) for IROR;
MAGIC-Level is (32,158.6-36,370.7 MeV*) for K-Mean: (17,132.33 MeV*); (3,420.9-3,868.9 MeV*) for IROR;
DAINTY-Level is (105,033-118,791 MeV*) for K-Mean: (55,956.0 MeV*); (11,173-12,636 MeV*) for IROR;
TRUTH-Level is (343,050-387,982 MeV*) for K-Mean: (182,758.0 MeV*); (36,492-41,271 MeV*) for IROR;
SUPER-Level is (1,120,437-1,267,190 MeV*) for K-Mean: (596,906.8 MeV*); (119,186-134,797 MeV*) for IROR.

The K-Means define individual materialising families of elementary particles;

the (UP/DOWN-Mean) sets the (PION-FAMILY: po, p+, p-);
the (STRANGE-Mean) specifies the (KAON-FAMILY: Ko, K+, K-);
the (CHARM-Mean) defines the (J/PSI=J/Y-Charmonium-FAMILY);
the (BEAUTY-Mean) sets the (UPSILON=U-Bottonium-FAMILY);
the (MAGIC-Mean) specifies the (EPSILON=E-FAMILY);
the (DAINTY-Mean) bases the (OMICRON-O-FAMILY);
the (TRUTH-Mean) sets the (KOPPA=J-Topomium-FAMILY) and
the (SUPER-Mean) defines the final quark state in the (HIGGS/CHI=H/C-FAMILY).

The VPE-Means are indicators for average effective quarkmasses found in particular interactions.
Kernel-K-mixing of the wavefunctions gives K(+)=60.210 MeV* and K(-)=31.983 MeV* and the IROR-Ring-Mixing gives (L(+)=6.405 MeV* and L(-)=3.402 MeV*) for a (L-K-Mean of 1.50133 MeV*) and a (L-IROR-Mean of 4.90349 MeV*); the Electropole ([e-]=0.52049 MeV*) as the effective electronmass and as determined from the electronic radius and the magnetocharge in the UFoQR.

The restmasses for the elementary particles can now be constructed, using the basic nucleonic restmass (mc=9.9247245x10-28 kg*=(Squareroot of [Omega]xmP) and setting (mc) as the basic maximum (UP/DOWN-K-mass=mass(KERNEL CORE)=3xmass(KKK)=3x319.62 MeV*=958.857 MeV*);
Subtracting the (Ring VPE 3xL(+)=19.215 MeV*, one gets the basic nucleonic K-state for the atomic nucleus (made from protons and neutrons) in: {m(n0;p+)=939.642 MeV*}.


The HB discussed in the New Scientist post below is said of having been measured in the decay of W's, Z's and Tau Leptons, as well as the bottom- and top-quark systems described in the table and the text above.

Now in the table I write about the KIR-OR transitions and such. The K means core for kernel and the IR means InnerRing and the OR mean OuterRing. The Rings are all to do with Leptons and the Kernels with Quarks.

So the Tau-decay relates to 'Rings' which are charmed and strange and bottomised and topped, say. They are higher energy manifestations of the basic nucleons of the proton and the neutrons and basic mesons and hyperons.

As I have shown, the energy resonances of the Z-boson (uncharged) represents an 'average' or statistical mean value of the 'Top-Quark' and the Upper-Limit for the Higgs Boson is a similar 'Super-Quark' 'average' and as the weak interaction unification energy.

The hitherto postulated Higgs Boson mass of so 110 GeV is the Omicron-resonance, fully predicted from the table above (unique to Quantum Relativity).
Now the most fundamental way to generate the Higgs Boson as a 'weak interaction' gauge is through the coupling of two equal mass, but oppositely charged W-bosons (of whom the Zo is the uncharged counterpart).

We have seen, that the W-mass is a summation of all the other quark-masses as kernel-means from the strangeness upwards to the truth-quark level.
So simply doubling the 80.47 GeV mass of the weak-interaction gauge boson must represent the basic form of the Higgs Boson and that is 160.9 GeV.

Simplicity indeed and just the way Quantum Relativity describes the creation of the Higgs Boson from even more fundamental templates of the so called 'gauges'. The Higgs Boson is massless but consists of two classical electron rings and a massless doubled neutrino kernel, and then emerges in the magnetocharge induction AS mass carrying gauges.

This massless neutrino kernel now crystallises our atomic solar system.


Next we interpret this scalar (or sterile) Double-Higgs (anti)neutrino as a majoron and lose the distinction between antineutrino and neutrino eigenstates.

We can only do this in the case of the Zo decay pattern, which engage the boson spin of the Zo as a superposition of two antineutrinos for the matter case and the superposition of two neutrinos in the antimatter case from first principles.

So the Zo IS a Majorana particle, which merges the templates of two antineutrinos say and SPININDUCES the Higgs-Antineutrino.
And where does this occur? It occurs at the Mesonic-Inner-Ring Boundary previously determined at the 2.776x10-18 meter marker.
This marker so specifies the Zo Boson energy level explicitely as an upper boundary relative to the displacement scale set for the kernel at the wormhole radius rw=lw/2π and the classical electron radius as the limit for the nuclear interaction scale at 3 fermis in: RcomptonxAlpha.

So the particle masses of the standard model in QED and QCD become Compton-Masses, which are HIGGS-MASSINDUCED at the Mesonic-Inner-Ring (MIR) marker at RMIR=2.776x10-18 meters.

The Compton masses are directly obtained from E=hf=mc2=hc/λ and say as characteristic particle energies.
At the Leptonic-Outer-Ring or LOR; λLOR=2πRe and at the MIR λMIR=2πRMIR for characteristic energies of 71.38 GeV and 71.33 MeV respectively.

So we know that the Higgs-Mass-Induction occurs at those energy levels from the elementary template and as experimentally verified in terms of the neutrino masses by Super-Kamiokande in 1998.
The LOR-energy of course indicates the Muon mass as a 'heavy electron' and the MIR-energy indicates the associated 'heavy quark' mass.

This has been described before in the general mass induction scales for the diquarks as consequence from the bosonic bifurcation of string masses (XL-Boson string splits into quark- and lepton fermions as fundamental supersymmetry and the magnification of the Planck-scale).
We also know, that the elementary proto-nucleon seed mc has grown in a factor of Yn~(1.618034)n~1.72 for a present n=1.1324..to create the present nucleonmasses in a perturbation of its finestructure.
Subsequently, the MIR-energy of 71.38 GeV represents a Zo-Boson seed, which has similarly increased between a factor of √(Yn)~1.313 and Yn~1.724.

These values so give present boundary conditions for the Higgs Boson in terms of its Zo coupling as the interval {93.73-123.09} GeV* or {93.50-122.79} GeV. The latter interval reduces by 1.58% to {92.02-120.85} GeV, as we have used the 'effective electron mass' me, differing in that percentage from the bare electron's restmass in our calculations.
The lower bounded HB so manifests in the form of the Zo and as the majorana Higgs-Induction and coupled to the Spin-Induction of the Scalar Higgs Antineutrino.
As described previously; the Zo-Boson mass is the mean of the top-quark K-Mean as 91.380 GeV* = 91.155 GeV and so relates the quark energy levels to the Higgs inductions for both spin and inertia. This occurs at the down-strange ds-diquark level of the cosmogenesis.

The W-Boson masses are the summation of the quark K-Means and represents the summation of all lower diquark energy levels from doubleup to doubledown.
As the down-strange or MIR-LOR energy level is coupled as a Kernel-MIR level in the bottom-antibottom mesonic diquark system, the energy difference between the Zo- and the W-bosons should amount to that b-quark energy of about 10 GeV and which indeed is experimentally verified as such.
Finally the doublestrange diquark level then becomes the well known Fermi-Energy of the Superquark K-Mean at 298.453 GeV*=297.717 GeV and which reduces to 293.013 GeV in the 1.58% in the SI mensuration system for an Fermi energy of 1.165x10-5 1/GeV2.

Quantum Relativity then stipulates, that the Higgs-Mass-Induction energies will assume particular energy value related to the diquark mass induction table of the K-Means, coupled to the weakon masses as indicated.
The overarching energy level is however that at 92 GeV as the lower bound and as represented in the definition of the Zo-Boson as a Majorana Spininduced scalar Higgs boson. The upper bound is the Fermi energy of the Super-Diquark as a doublestrange.
This 92 GeV level represents a seedling energy of 71.38 GeV from the primordial universe and when the XL-Boson aka the heterotic string class HO(32) decayed into a fermionic quark-lepton bifurcation and which today is represented in the diquark eigenstates of the standard model in particle physics through its Unitary Symmetries.


 


3.3 The Parametrisation of the Friedmann Equation


It is well known, that the Radius of Curvature in the Field Equations of General Relativity relates to the Energy-Mass Tensor in the form of the critical density rcritical = 3Ho2/8pG and the Hubble Constant Ho as the square of frequency or alternatively as the time differential of frequency df/dt as a cosmically applicable angular acceleration independent on the radial displacement.


The scientific nomenclature (language) then describes this curved space in differential equations relating the positions of the 'points' in both space and time in a 4-dimensional description called Riemannian Tensor Space or similar.
This then leads mathematically, to the formulation of General Relativity in Einstein's field Equations:

 

einstein1-.37565.
for the Einstein-Riemann tensor
einstein2-.37566.
 

and is built upon ten so-called nonlinear coupled hyperbolic-elliptic partial differential equations, which needless to say, are mathematically rather complex and often cannot be solved analytically without simplifying the geometries of the parametric constituents (say objects interacting in so called tensor-fields of stress-energy {Tμν} and curvatures in the Riemann-Einstein tensor {Gμν}, either changing the volume in reduction Ricci tensor {Rij} with scalar curvature R as {Rgμν} for the metric tensor {gμν} or keeping the volume of considered space invariant to volume change in a Tidal Weyl tensor {Rμν}).


The Einstein-Riemann tensor then relates Curvature Radius R to the Energy-Mass tensor E=Mc2 via the critical density as 8pG/c4=3Ho2VcriticalMcriticalc2/Mcriticalc4 = 3Ho2Vcritical/c2 = 3Vcritical/R2 as Curvature Radius R by the Hubble Law applicable say to a nodal Hubble Constant Ho = c/RHubble.


The cosmological field equations then can be expressed as the square of the nodal Hubble Constant and inclusive of a 'dark energy' terms often identified with the Cosmological Constant of Albert Einstein, here denoted LEinstein. Substituting the Einstein Lambda with the time differential for the square of nodal Hubble frequency as the angular acceleration acting on a quantized volume of space however; naturally and universally replaces the enigma of the 'dark energy' with a space inherent angular acceleration component, which can be identified as the 'universal consciousness quantum' directly from the standard cosmology itself.


The field equations so can be generalised in a parametrization of the Hubble Constant assuming a cyclic form, oscillating between a minimum and maximum value given by Ho=dn/dt for cycletime n=Hot and where then time t is the 4-vector timespace of Minkowski lightpath x=ct.
The Einstein Lambda then becomes then the energy-acceleration difference between the baryonic mass content of the universe and an inherent mass energy related to the initial condition of the oscillation parameters for the nodal Hubble Constant.


LEinstein = GoMo/R(n)2 - 2cHo/(n+1)3 = Cosmological Acceleration - Intrinsic Universal Milgröm Deceleration as: gmnL = 8pG/c4 Tmn - Gmn
then becomes Gmn + gmnL = 8pG/c4 Tmn and restated in a mass independent form for an encompassment of the curvature finestructures.

 


Energy Conservation and Continuity:


dE + PdV = TdS =0 (First Law of Thermodynamics) for a cosmic fluid and scaled Radius R=a.Ro; dR/dt = da/dt.Ro and d2R/dt2 = d2a/dt2.Ro


dV/dt = {dV/dR}.{dR/dt} = 4pa2Ro3.{da/dt}


dE/dt = d(mc2)/dt = c2.d{rV}/dt = (4pRo3.c2/3){a3.dr/dt + 3a2r.da/dt}


dE + PdV = (4pRo3.a2){rc2.da/dt + [ac2/3].dr/dt + P.da/dt} = 0 for the cosmic fluid energy-pressure continuity equation:


dr/dt = -3{(da/dt)/a.{r + P/c2}} .........................................................................................(1)


The independent Einstein Field Equations of the Robertson-Walker metric reduce to the Friedmann equations:


H2 = {(da/dt)/a}2 = 8pGr/3 - kc2/a2 + L/3 ...................................................................................(2)


{(d2a/dt2)/a} = -4pG/3{r+ 3P/c2} + L/3 ..................................................................................(3)


for scale radius a=R/Ro; Hubble parameter H = {da/dt)/a}; Gravitational Constant G; Density r; Curvature k ; light speed c and Cosmological Constant L.


Differentiating (2) and substituting (1) with (2) gives (3):


{2(da/dt).(d2a/dt2).a2 - 2a.(da/dt).(da/dt)2}/a4 = 8pG.(dr/dt)/3 + 2kc2.(da/dt)/a3 + 0 = (8pG/3)(-3{(da/dt)/a.{r + P/c2}} + 2kc2.(da/dt)/a3 + 0


(2(da/dt)/a).{(d2a/dt2).a - (da/dt)2}/a2 = (8pG/3){-3(da/dt)/a}.{r + P/c2} + 2{(da/dt)/a}.(kc2/a2) +0 2{(da/dt)/a}.{(d2a/dt2).a - (da/dt)2}/a2 = 2{(da/dt)/a}{-4pG.{r + P/c2} + (kc2/a2)} +0 with kc2/a2= 8pGr/3 +L/3 - {(da/dt)/a}2


d{H2}/dt = 2H.dH/dt = 2{(da/dt)/a}.dH/dt dH/dt = {[d2a/dt2]/a - H2} = {-4pG.(r + P/c2) + 8pGr/3 + L/3 -H2} = -4pG/3(r + 3P/c2) + L/3 - H2} = -4pG/3(r + 3P/c2) + L/3 - 8pGr/3 + kc2/a2 - L/3} = -4pG.(r + P/c2) + kc2/a2


dH/dt = -4pG{r+P/c2} as the Time derivative for the Hubble parameter H for flat Minkowski spacetime with curvature k=0


{(d2a/dt2).a - (da/dt)2}/a2 = -4pG{r + P/c2} + (kc2/a2) + 0 = -4pG{r + P/c2} + 8pGr/3 - {(da/dt)/a}2 + L/3
{(d2a/dt2)/a} = (-4pG/3){3r + 3P/c2- 2r} = (-4pG/3){r + 3P/c2} + L/3 = dH/dt + H2

 

dH/dt + 4pGr = - 4pGP/c2 .... (for V4/10D=[4p/3]RH3 and V5/11D=2p2RH3 in factor 3p/2)

areset = Rk(n)AdS/Rk(n)dS + ½ = n-SPnk-1+Pnk +½ Scalefactor modulation at Nk={[n-SPnk-1]/Pnk } = ½ reset coordinate
{dH/dt} = areset .d{Ho/T(n)}/dt = - Ho2(2n+1)(n+3/2)/T(n)2 for k=0

dH/dt + 4pGr = - 4pGP/c2

-Ho2(2n+1)(n+3/2)/T(n)2 + GoMo/{RH3(n/[n+1])3}{4p} = L(n)/{RH(n/[n+1])} + L/3 -2Ho2{[n+1]2-¼}/T[n]2 + GoMo/RH3(n/[n+1])3{4p} = L(n)/RH(n/[n+1]) + L/3 -2Ho2{[n+1]2-¼}/T(n)2 + 4p.GoMo/RH3(n/[n+1])3 = L(n)/RH(n/[n+1]) + L/3
For a scalefactor a=n/[n+1] = {1-1/[n+1]} = 1/{1+1/n}

L(n)/RH(n/[n+1]) = - 4pGP/c2 = GoMo/RH3(n/[n+1])3 -2Ho2/(n[n+1]2)
and L = 0
for -P(n) = L(n)c2[n+1]/4pGonRH =L(n)Hoc[n+1]/4pGon = Moc2[n+1]3/4pn3RH3 - Ho2c2/2pGon[n+1]2
 
For n=1.13242:............ -(+6.7003x10-11 J/m3)* = (2.12682x10-11 J/m3)* + (-8.82709x10-11 J/m3)*
Negative Dark Energy Pressure = Positive Matter Energy + Negative Inherent Milgröm Deceleration(cHo/Go)
 

The Dark Energy and the 'Cosmological Constant' exhibiting the nature of an intrinsic negative pressure in the cosmology become defined in the overall critical deceleration and density parameters. The pressure term in the Friedmann equations being a quintessence of function n and changing sign from positive to negative to positive as indicated. For a present measured deceleration parameter qdS=-0.5585, the DE Lambda calculates as -6.700x10-11 (N/m2=J/m3)*, albeit as a positive pressure within the negative quintessence.


In the early radiation dominated cosmology; the quintessence was positive and the matter energy dominated the intrinsic Milgröm deceleration from the Instanton n=nps to n=0.18023 (about 3.04 Billion years) when the quintessence vanished and including a Recombination epoch when the hitherto opaque universe became transparent in the formation of the first hydrogen atoms from the quark-lepton plasma transmuted from the X-L Boson string class HO(32) of the Inflaton epoch preceding the Quantum Big Bang aka the Instanton.


From the modular membrane duality for wormhole radius rps = lps/2p, the critical modulated Schwarzschild radius rss = 2plss = 2px1022 m* for lps = 1/lss and for an applied scalefactor a = n/[n+1] = lss/RH = {1-1/[n+1]}
for a n=Hot coordinate nrecombination = 6.259485x10-5 or about 6.259485x10-5(16.88 Gy) = 1.056601 Million years attenuated by exp{-hf/kT} = e-1 = 0.367879 to a characteristic cosmological time coordinate of 0.36788x1.056601 = 388,702 years after the Instanton nps.


The attenuation of the recombination coordinate then gives the cosmic temperature background for this epoch in the coordinate interval for the curvature radius R(n=2.302736x10-5) = 3.67894x1021 m* to R(n=6.259485x10-5) = 1022 m*. This radial displacement scale represents the size of a typical major galaxy in the cosmology; a galactic structure, which became potentialised in the Schwarzschild matter evolution and its manifestation in the ylemic prototypical first generation magnetar-neutron stars, whose emergence was solely dependent on the experienced cosmic temperature background and not on their mass distributions.


The temperature evolution of the Instanton can be written as a function of the luminosity L(n,T) with R(n)=RH(n/[n+1]) as the radius of the luminating surface L(nps,T(nps) = 6π2lps2.σ.Tnps4 = 2.6711043034x1096 Watts*, where σ = Stefan's Constant = 2π5k4/15h3c2 and as a product of the defined 'master constants' k, h, c2, π and 'e'.


L(n,T) = 3HoMo.c2/550n and for Temperature T(nps) ----------- T(nps) = 2.93515511x1036 Kelvin*.


T(n)4 = HoMoc2/(2p2sRH2[550n3/[n+1]2]) for T(n)4 = {[n+1]2/n3}HoMoc2/(2p2sRH2[550]) = 18.1995{[n+1]2/n3} (K4/V)* for a temperature interval in using the recombination epoch coordinates T(n1=6.2302736x10-5) = 2945.42 K* to T(n2=6.259485x10-5) = 2935.11 K*


This manifests as a 'false vacuum' and as a temperature gradient, as a causation of the Big Bang Instanton on physical grounds. The metaphysical ground is the symmetry breaking from the source parity violation described in the birth and necessity of the Graviton to resymmetrize the UFoQR.


T(nps) of the singularity is 0.0389 or 3.89% of the pre-singularity.


So the POTENTIAL Temperature manifests as 3.89% in the KINETIC Temperature' which doubles in the Virial Theorem to 7.78% as 2KE + PE = 0: TEMPERATURE/T(nps)=7.544808988..x1037/2.93515511x1036=25.705=1/0.03890...

 

planckrad-.37587.

Applying the actual VPE at the Instanton to this temperature gradient:


rVPE/rEMR = {4pEps/lps3}/{8p5Eps4/15h3c3} = 15/2p4 = 0.07599486.. = 1/12.9878.. indicating the proportionality EVPE/EEMR = 2Tps/Tpotential at the Instanton from the Inflaton as a original form of the vbirial theorem, staing the Kinetic Energy of the Instanton and the QBB Lambda to be twice the Potential Energy of the de Broglie wave matter Inflaton, then manifesting as the Mo/2MHubble = rHyper/2RHubble Schwarzschild mass cosmo-evolution.


Now reducing the timeinstanton tps=nps/Ho of 3.33x10-31 seconds by the Temperature Gradient in the Luminosity Function gives you the scalar Higgs Potential Maximum at a pre-singularity time of tHiggsPE=tps.T(nps)/TEMPERATURE=1.297x10-32 seconds.


This then extrapolates the Big Bang singularity backwards in Time to harmonise the equations and to establish the 'driving force of the vacuum' as potential scalar Higgs Temperature Field. All the further evolvement of the universe so becomes a function of Temperature and not of mass. The next big phasetransition is the attunement of the BOSONIC UNIFICATION, namely the 'singularity' temperature Tps=1.41x1020 K with the Luminosity function. This occurs at a normal time of 1.9 nanoseconds into the cosmology.


It is then that the universe as a unity has this temperature and so allows BOSONIC differentiation between particles. The INDIVIDUATED PHOTON of the mass was born then and not before, as the entire universe was a PHOTON as a macroquantised superstring up to then. The size of the universe at that time was that of being 1.14 metres across. Next came th

e electroweak symmetry breaking at 1/365 seconds and at a temperature of so 1015 Kelvin* and so it continued.
The lower dimensional lightpath x=ct in lightspeed invariance c=lf so becomes modular dualised in the higher dimensional lightpath of the tachyonic de Broglie Inflaton-Instanton Vdebroglie=c/nps of the Inflaton.

 

decepar.

 

{(2-n)(n+1)}3/n3 = VdS'/VdS ......(4.36038 for npresent) in the first completing Hubble cycle n3/(2-n)3 =VAdS/VdS' ................. (2.22379 for npresent) in the first completing Hubble cycle (n+1)3 = VAdS/VdS .....................(9.69657 for npresent) in the first completing Hubble cycle


rcritical = 3Ho2/8pGo {Sphere} and Ho2/4p2Go {Hypersphere-Torus in factor 3p/2} (constant for all n per Hubble cycle) rcritical = 3.78782x10-27 [kg/m3]* and 8.038003x10-28 [kg/m3]*
rdSVdS = rdS'VdS' = rAdSVAdS = rcriticalVHubble = MHubble = c2RH/2Go = 6.47061227x1052 kg*

 

curvatureads--37597-.37598.

 

The mm
3.4 The Primordial Neutron Decay in an Holographic Universe

mm


 

 

3.5 The first Ylemic Stars in the Universe

 

The stability of stars is a function of the equilibrium condition, which balances the inward pull of gravity with the outward pressure of the thermodynamic energy or enthalpy of the star (H=PV+U). The Jeans Mass MJ and the Jeans Length RJ a used to describe the stability conditions for collapsing molecular hydrogen clouds to form stars say, are well known in the scientific data base, say in formulations such as:

MJ=3kTR/2Gm for a Jeans Length of: RJ=√{15kT/(4πρGm)}=RJ =√(kT/Gnm²).

 

Now the Ideal Gas Law of basic thermodynamics states that the internal pressure P and Volume of such an ideal gas are given by PV=nRT=NkT for n moles of substance being the Number N of molecules (say) divided by Avogadro's Constant L in n=N/L .

Since the Ideal Gas Constant R divided by Avogadro's Constant L and defines Boltzmann's Constant k=R/L. Now the statistical analysis of kinetic energy KE of particles in motion in a gas (say) gives a root-mean-square velocity (rms) and the familiar 2.KE=mv²(rms) from the distribution of individual velocities v in such a system.

 

It is found that PV=(2/3)N.KE as a total system described by the v(rms). Now set the KE equal to the Gravitational PE=GMm/R for a spherical gas cloud and you get the Jeans Mass. (3/2N).(NkT)=GMm/R with m the mass of a nucleon or Hydrogen atom and M=MJ=3kTR/2Gm as stated.

 

The Jeans' Length is the critical radius of a cloud (typically a cloud of interstellar dust) where thermal energy, which causes the cloud to expand, is counteracted by gravity, which causes the cloud to collapse. It is named after the British astronomer Sir James Jeans, who first derived the quantity; where k is Boltzmann Constant, T is the temperature of the cloud, r is the radius of the cloud, μ is the mass per particle in the cloud, G is the Gravitational Constant and ρ is the cloud's mass density (i.e. the cloud's mass divided by the cloud's volume).

 

Now following the Big Bang, there were of course no gas clouds in the early expanding universe and the Jeans formulations are not applicable to the mass seedling Mo; in the manner of the Jeans formulations as given.

However, the universe's dynamics is in the form of the expansion parameter of GR and so the R(n)=Rmax(n/(n+1)) scalefactor of Quantum Relativity.
So we can certainly analyse this expansion in the form of the Jeans Radius of the first protostars, which so obey the equilibrium conditions and equations of state of the much later gas clouds, for which the Jeans formulations then apply on a say molecular level.
This analysis so defines the ylemic neutron stars as protostars and the first stars in the cosmogenesis and the universe.

 

Let the thermal internal energy or ITE=H be the outward pressure in equilibrium with the gravitational potential energy of GPE=Ω. The nuclear density in terms of the superbrane parameters is ρcritical=mc/Vcritical with mc a base-nuleon mass for a 'ylemic neutron'.

Vcritical= 4πRe3/3 or the volume for the ylemic neutron as given by the classical electron radius

Re=1010λwormhole/360=e*/2c2.

H=(molarity)kT for molar volume as N=(R/Re)3 for dH=3kTR2/Re3.
Ω(R)= -∫GoMdm/R = -{3Gomc2/(Re3)2 }∫R4dR = -3Gomc2R5/Re6 for
dm/dR=d(ρV)/dR=4πρR2 and for ρ=3mc/4πRe3

For equilibrium, the requirement is that dH=dΩ in the minimum condition dH+dΩ=0.
This gives: dH+dΩ=3kTR2/Re3 - 16Goπ2ρ2R4/3=0 and the ylemic radius as:

 

Rylem=√{kTRe/Gomc2}

 

as the Jeans-Length precursor or progenitor for subsequent stellar and galactic generation.

 

The ylemic (Jeans) radii are all independent of the mass of the star as a function of its nuclear generated temperature. Applied to the protostars of the vortex neutron matter or ylem, the radii are all neutron star radii and define a specific range of radii for the gravitational collapse of the electron degenerate matter.

This spans from the 'First Three Minutes' scenario of the cosmogenesis to 1.1 million seconds (or about 13 days) and encompasses the standard beta decay of the neutron (underpinning radioactivity). The upper limit defines a trillion degree temperature and a radius of over 40 km; the trivial Schwarzschild solution gives a typical ylem radius of so 7.4 kilometers and the lower limit defines the 'mysterious' planetesimal limit as 1.8 km.

For long a cosmological conundrum, it could not be modelled just how the molecular and electromagnetic forces applicable to conglomerate matter distributions (say gaseous hydrogen as cosmic dust) on the quantum scale of molecules could become strong enough to form say 1km mass concentrations, required for 'ordinary' gravity to assume control.

The ylem radii's lower limit is defined in this cosmology then show, that it is the ylemic temperature of the 1.2 billion degrees K, which perform the trick under the Ylem-Jeans formulation and which then is applied to the normal collapse of hydrogenic atoms in summation.

The stellar evolution from the ylemic (dineutronic) templates is well established in QR and confirms most of the Standard Model's ideas of nucleosynthesis and the general Temperature cosmology. The standard model is correct in the temperature assignment, but is amiss in the corresponding 'size-scales' for the cosmic expansion.

The Big Bang cosmogenesis describes the universe as a Planck-Black Body Radiator, which sets the Cosmic-Microwave-Black Body Background Radiation Spectrum (CMBBR) as a function of n as T4=18.2(n+1)2/n3 and derived from the Stefan-Boltzmann-Law and the related statistical frequency distributions.

We have the GR metric for Schwarzschild-Black Hole Evolution as RS=2GM/c² as a function of the star's Black Hole's mass M and we have the ylemic Radius as a function of temperature only as Rylem√(kT.Re3/Gomc2).

The nucleonic mass-seed mc=mP.Alpha9 and the product Gomc2 is a constant in the partitioned n-evolution of

mc(n)=Yn.mc and G(n)=Go.Xn.

Identifying the ylemic Radius with the Schwarzschild Radius then indicates a specific mass a specific temperature and a specific radius.

Those we call the Chandrasekhar Parameters:
MChandra=1.5 solar Masses=3x1030 kg and RChandra=2GoMChandra/c² or 7407.40704..metres, which is the typical neutron star radius inferred today.

TChandra=RChandra2.Gomc2/kRe3 =1.985x1010 K for Electron Radius Re and Boltzmann's Constant k.

Those Chandrasekhar parameters then define a typical neutron star with a uniform temperature of 20 billion K at the white dwarf limit of ordinary stellar nucleosynthetic evolution (Hertzsprung-Russell or HR-diagram).
The Radius for the massparametric Universe is given in R(n)=Rmax(1-n/(n+1)) correlating the ylemic temperatures as the 'uniform' CMBBR-background and we can follow the evolution of the ylemic radius via the approximation:

Rylem=0.05258..√T=(0.0753).[(n+1)2/n3][1/8]

Rylem(npresent=1.1324..)=0.0868 m* for a Tylem(npresent )=2.73 K for the present time
tpresent=npresent/Ho.

 

What then is nChandra?
This would describe the size of the universe as the uniform temperature CMBBR today manifesting as the largest stars, mapped however onto the ylemic neutron star evolution as the protostars (say as nChandra'), defined not in manifested mass (say neutron conglomerations), but as a quark-strange plasma, (defined in QR as the Vortex-Potential-Energy or VPE).

 

R(nChandra')=Rmax(nChandra'/(nChandra'+1))=7407.40741.. for nChandra'=4.64x10-23 and so a time of tChandra'=nChandra'/Ho=nChandra'/1.88x10-18=2.47x10-5 seconds.

QR defines the Weyl-Temperature limit for Bosonic Unification as 1.9 nanoseconds at a temperature of 1.4x1020 Kelvin and the weak-electromagnetic unification at 1/365 seconds at T=3.4x1015 K.

 

So we place the first ylemic protostar after the bosonic unification (before which the plenum was defined as undifferentiated 'bosonic plasma'), but before the electro-weak unification, which defined the Higgs-Bosonic restmass induction via the weak interaction vector-bosons and allowing the dineutrons to be born.

The universe was so 15 km across, when its ylemic 'concentrated' VPE-Temperature was so 20 Billion K and we find the CMBBR in the Stefan-Boltzmann-Law as:


T4=18.20(n+1)2/n3=1.16x1017 Kelvin.

 

So the thermodynamic temperature for the expanding universe was so 5.85 Million times greater than the ylemic VPE-Temperature; and implying that no individual ylem stars could yet form from the mass seedling Mo.

The universe's expansion however cooled the CMBBR background and we to calculate the scale of the universe corresponding to this ylemic scenario; we simply calculate the 'size' for the universe at TChandra=20 Billion K for TChandra4 and we then find nChandra=4.89x10-14 and tChandra=26,065 seconds or so 7.24 hours.

 

The Radius R(nChandra)=7.81x1012 metres or 7.24 lighthours.
This is about 52 Astronomical Units and an indicator for the largest possible star in terms of radial extent and the 'size' of a typical solar system, encompassed by supergiants on the HR-diagram.

We so know that the ylemic temperature decreases in direct proportion to the square of the ylemic radius and one hitherto enigmatic aspect in cosmology relates to this in the planetesimal limit. Briefly, a temperature of so 1.2 billion degrees defines an ylemic radius of 1.8 km as the dineutronic limit for proto-neutron stars contracting from so 80 km down to this size just 1.1 million seconds or so 13 days after the Big Bang.

 

This then 'explains' why chunks of matter can conglomerate via molecular and other adhesive interactions towards this size, where then the accepted gravity is strong enough to build planets and moons. It works, because the ylemic template is defined in subatomic parameters reflecting the mesonic-inner and leptonic outer ring boundaries, the planetesimal limit being the leptonic mapping. So neutrino- and quark blueprints micromacro dance their basic definition as the holographic projections of the spacetime quanta.

 

Now because the Electron Radius is directly proportional to the linearised wormhole perimeter and then the Compton Radius via Alpha in Re=1010λwormhole/360=e*/2c2=Alpha.RCompton, the Chandrasekhar White Dwarf limit should be doubled to reflect the protonic diameter mirrored in the classical electron radius.

 

Hence any star experiencing electron degeneracy is actually becoming ylemic or dineutronic, the boundary for this process being the Chandrasekhar mass. This represents the subatomic mapping of the first Bohr orbit collapsing onto the leptonic outer ring in the quarkian wave-geometry.


But this represents the Electron Radius as a Protonic Diameter and the Protonic Radius must then indicate the limit for the scale where proton degeneracy would have to enter the scenario. As the proton cannot degenerate in that way, the neutron star must enter Black Hole phasetransition at the Re/2 scale, corresponding to a mass of 8MChandra=24x1030 kg* or 12 solar masses.

 

The maximum ylemic radius so is found from the constant density proportion ρ=M/V:
(Rylemmax/Re)3=MChandra/mc for Rylemmax=40.1635 km.

 

The corresponding ylemic temperature is 583.5 Billion K for a CMBBR-time of 287 seconds or so 4.8 minutes from a n=5.4x10-16, when the universe had a diameter of so 173 Million km.
But for a maximum nuclear compressibility for the protonic radius, we find:

(Rylemmax/Re)3=8MChandra/mc for Rylemmax=80.327 km, a ylemic temperature of 2,334 Billion K for a n-cycletime of 8.5x10-17 and a CMBBR-time of so 45 seconds and when the universe had a radius of 13.6 Million km or was so 27 Million km across.

 

The first ylemic protostar vortex was at that time manifested as the ancestor for all neutron star generations to follow. This vortex is described in a cosmic string encircling a spherical region so 160 km across and within a greater universe of diameter 27 Million km which carried a thermodynamic temperature of so 2.33 Trillion Kelvin at that point in the cosmogenesis.

 

This vortex manifested as a VPE concentration after the expanding universe had cooled to allow the universe to become transparent from its hitherto defining state of opaqueness and a time known as the decoupling of matter (in the form of the Mo seedling partitioned in mc's) from the radiation pressure of the CMBBR photons.

The temperature for the decoupling is found in the galactic scale-limit modular dual to the wormhole geodesic as 1/λwormholeantiwormholegalaxyserpent=1022 metres or so 1.06 Million ly and its luminosity attenuation in the 1/e proportionality for then 388,879 lightyears as a decoupling time ndecoupling.

 

A maximum galactic halo limit is modulated in 2πλantiwormhole metres in the linearisation of the Planck-length encountered before in an earlier discussion.

 

R(ndecoupling)=Rmax(ndecoupling/(ndecouplingc+1))=1022 metres for ndecoupling=6.26x10-5 and so for a CMBBR-Temperature of about T=2935 K for a galactic protocore then attenuated in so 37% for ndecouplingmin=1.0x10-6 for R=λantiwormhole/2π and ndecouplingmax=3.9x10-4 for R=2πλantiwormhole and for temperatures of so 65,316 K and 744 K respectively, descriptive of the temperature modulations between the galactic cores and the galactic halos.

So a CMBBR-temperature of so 65,316 K at a time of so 532 Billion seconds or 17,000 years defined the initialisation of the VPE and the birth of the first ylemic protostars as a decoupling minimum. The ylemic mass currents were purely monopolic and known as superconductive cosmic strings, consisting of nucleonic neutrons, each of mass mc.

 

If we assign this timeframe to the maximised ylemic radius and assign our planetesimal limit of fusion temperature 1.2 Billion K as a corresponding minimum; then this planetesimal limit representing the onset of stellar fusion in a characteristic temperature, should indicate the first protostars at a temperature of the CMBBR of about 744 Kelvin.

The universe had a tremperature of 744 K for ndecouplingmax=3.9x10-4 for R=2πλantiwormhole and this brings us to a curvature radius of so 6.6 Million lightyears and an 'ignition-time' for the first physical ylemic neutron stars as first generation protostars of so 7 Million years after the Big Bang.

 

The important cosmological consideration is that of distance-scale modulation.
The Black Hole Schwarzschild metric is the inverse of the galactic scale metric.
The linearisation of the Planck-String as the Weyl-Geodesic and so the wormhole radius in the curvature radius R(n) is modular dual and mirrored in inversion in the manifestation of galactic structure with a nonluminous halo a luminous attenuated diameter-bulge and a superluminous (quasar or White Hole Core).

The core-bulge ratio will so reflect the eigenenergy quantum of the wormhole as heterotic Planck-Boson-String or as the magnetocharge as 1/500, being the mapping of the Planck-Length-Bounce as e=lP.c²√Alpha onto the electron radius in e*=2Re.c².


 

 

3.6 The Mass Seed Mo in the Planck Plasma Cosmic Friedmann Liquid

mm


 

 

3.7 The wormhole wavelength and the Magnetic Permeability Constantxxx


 

 

 3.8 A Synthesis of LCDM with MOND in an Universal Lambda Milgröm Deceleration

420px-m33_rotation_curve_hi-.37607.

 

[Excerpt from Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modified_Newtonian_dynamics


Several independent observations point to the fact that the visible mass in galaxies and galaxy clusters is insufficient to account for their dynamics, when analysed using Newton's laws. This discrepancy – known as the "missing mass problem" – was first identified for clusters by Swiss astronomer Fritz Zwicky in 1933 (who studied the Coma cluster),[4][5] and subsequently extended to include spiral galaxies by the 1939 work of Horace Babcock on Andromeda.[6] These early studies were augmented and brought to the attention of the astronomical community in the 1960s and 1970s by the work of Vera Rubin at the Carnegie Institute in Washington, who mapped in detail the rotation velocities of stars in a large sample of spirals. While Newton's Laws predict that stellar rotation velocities should decrease with distance from the galactic centre, Rubin and collaborators found instead that they remain almost constant[7] – the rotation curves are said to be "flat". This observation necessitates at least one of the following: 1) There exists in galaxies large quantities of unseen matter which boosts the stars' velocities beyond what would be expected on the basis of the visible mass alone, or 2) Newton's Laws do not apply to galaxies. The former leads to the dark matter hypothesis; the latter leads to MOND.


220px-milgrom_mordechai-.37618.

MOND was proposed by Mordehai Milgrom in 1983


The basic premise of MOND is that while Newton's laws have been extensively tested in high-acceleration environments (in the Solar System and on Earth), they have not been verified for objects with extremely low acceleration, such as stars in the outer parts of galaxies. This led Milgrom to postulate a new effective gravitational force law (sometimes referred to as "Milgrom's law") that relates the true acceleration of an object to the acceleration that would be predicted for it on the basis of Newtonian mechanics.[1] This law, the keystone of MOND, is chosen to reduce to the Newtonian result at high acceleration but lead to different ("deep-MOND") behaviour at low acceleration:


mond1-.37613. ........(1)

Here FN is the Newtonian force, m is the object's (gravitational) mass, a is its acceleration, μ(x) is an as-yet unspecified function (known as the "interpolating function"), and a0 is a new fundamental constant which marks the transition between the Newtonian and deep-MOND regimes. Agreement with Newtonian mechanics requires μ(x) → 1 for x >> 1, and consistency with astronomical observations requires μ(x) → x for x << 1. Beyond these limits, the interpolating function is not specified by the theory, although it is possible to weakly constrain it empirically.[8][9] Two common choices are:


mond2-.37614. ("Simple interpolating function"), and mond3-.37615. ("Standard interpolating function").


Thus, in the deep-MOND regime (a << a0):
mond4-.37616.
Applying this to an object of mass m in circular orbit around a point mass M (a crude approximation for a star in the outer regions of a galaxy), we find:


mond5-.37617. .......(2)

that is, the star's rotation velocity is independent of its distance r from the centre of the galaxy – the rotation curve is flat, as required. By fitting his law to rotation curve data, Milgrom found a0 ≈ 1.2 x 10−10 m s−2 to be optimal. This simple law is sufficient to make predictions for a broad range of galactic phenomena. Milgrom's law can be interpreted in two different ways. One possibility is to treat it as a modification to the classical law of inertia (Newton's second law), so that the force on an object is not proportional to the particle's acceleration a but rather to μ(a/a0)a. In this case, the modified dynamics would apply not only to gravitational phenomena, but also those generated by other forces, for example electromagnetism.[10] Alternatively, Milgrom's law can be viewed as leaving Newton's Second Law intact and instead modifying the inverse-square law of gravity, so that the true gravitational force on an object of mass m due to another of mass M is roughly of the form GMm/(μ(a/a0)r2). In this interpretation, Milgrom's modification would apply exclusively to gravitational phenomena. [End of excerpt]

 

 

For LCDM: acceleration a: a = G{MBM+mDM}/R2


For MOND: acceleration a: a+amil = a{a/ao} = GMBM/R2 = v4/ao.R2 for v4 = GMBMao amil = a{a/ao-1} = a{a-ao}/ao = GMBM/R2 - a


For Newtonian acceleration a: G{MBM+mDM}/R2 = a = GMBM/R2 - amil


amil = - GmDM/R2 = (a/ao)(a-ao) and relating the Dark Matter to the Milgröm constant in interpolation amil
for the Milgröm deceleration applied to the Dark Matter and incorporating the radial independence of rotation velocities in the galactic structures as an additional acceleration term in the Newtonian gravitation as a function for the total mass of the galaxy and without DM in MOND.


Both, LCDM and MOND consider the Gravitational 'Constant' constant for all accelerations and vary either the mass content in LCDM or the acceleration in MOND in the Newtonian Gravitation formulation respectively. The standard gravitational parameter GM in a varying mass term G(M+m) = M(G+DG) reduces to Gm=DGM for a varying Gravitational parameter G in (G+DG) = f(G).


The Dark Matter term GmDM can be written as GmDM/R2 = -amil = a - a2/ao = DGM/R2 to identify the Milgröm acceleration constant as an intrinsic and universal deceleration related to the Dark Energy and the negative pressure term of the cosmological constant invoked to accommodate the apparent acceleration of the universal expansion (qdS = -0.5585).


DG = Go-G(n) in amil = -2cHo/[n+1]3 = {Go-G(n)}M/R2 for some function G(n) descriptive for the change in f(G).
The Milgröm constant so is not constant, but emerges as the initial boundary condition in the Instanton aka the Quantum Big Bang and is identfied as the parametric deceleration parameter in Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's Field Equations in amil.ao = a(a-ao) and ao(amil + a) = a2 or ao = a2/(amil+a).


A(n)= -2cHo/[n+1]3 = -2cHo2/RH[n+1]3 and calculates as -1.112663583x10-9 (m/s2)* at the Instanton and as -1.16189184x10-10 (m/s2)* for the present time coordinate.


The Gravitational Constant G(n)=GoXn in the standard gravitational parameter represents a finestructure in conjunction with a subscale quantum mass evolution for a proto nucleon mass mc = alpha9.mPlanck from the gravitational interaction finestructure constant ag = 2pGomc2/hc = 3.438304..x10-39 = alpha18 to unify electromagnetic and gravitational quantum interactions.


The proto nucleon mass mc(n) so varies as complementary finestructure to the finestructure for G in mcYn for a truly constant Go as defined in the interaction unification. G(n)M(n)=GoXn.MoYn = GoMo(XY)n = GoMo in the macro evolution of baryonic mass seedling Mo and Gomc in the micro evolution of the nucleonic seed remain constant to describes a particular finestructure for the timeframe in the cosmogenesis when the nonluminous Dark Matter remains separate from the luminous Baryon mass.


The DM-BM intersection coordinate is calculated for a cycletime n=Hot=1.4142..or at an universal true electromagnetic age of 23.872 billion years. At that time, the {BM-DM-DE} mass density distribution will be {5.536%; 22.005%; 72.459%}, with the G(n)M(n) assuming a constant value in the Hubble cycle. The Dark Energy pressure will be PPBM∩DM = -3.9300x10-11 (N/m2)* with a corresponding 'quasi cosmological constant' of LBM∩DM = -6.0969x10-37 (s-2)*.


Within a local inertial frame of measurement; the gravitational constant so becomes a function of the micro evolution of the proto nucleon mass mc from the string epoch preceding the Instanton. A localized measurement of G so engages the value of the mass of a neutron as evolved mc in a coupling to the evolution of the macro mass seedling Mo and so the baryonic omega Wo=Mo/MH = 0.02803 in the critical density rcritical = 3Ho2/8pGo = 3MH/4pRH3 = 3c2/8pGoRH2 for the zero curvature and a Minkowski flat cosmology.


The finestructure for G so engages both the micro mass mc and the macro mass Mo, the latter being described in the overall Hypermass evolution of the universe as a Black Hole cosmology in a 5/11D AdS 'closed' spacetime encompassing the dS spacetime evolution of the 4/10D 'open' universe. Details are described in a later section of this discourse.


The Milgröm 'constant' so relates an intrinsic Dark Energy cosmology to the macrocosmic hypermass evolution of Black Holes at the cores of galaxies and becomes universally applicable in that context. No modification of Newtonian gravitation is necessary, if the value of a locally derived and measured G is allowed to increase to its string based (Planck-Stoney) value of Go=1/k=4peo = 1.111..x10-10 string unification units [C*=m3/s2] and relating spacial volume to angular acceleration in gravitational parameter GM.


The necessity for Dark Matter to harmonise the hypermass evolution remains however, with the Dark Energy itself assuming the form of the Milgröm deceleration.


amil = -2cHo/[n+1]3 = -{Go-G(n)}M/R2 = -Go{1-Xn}M/R2 for the gravitational parameter GM coupled to the size of a galactic structure harbouring a central Black Hole-White Hole/Quasar power source.

 

GoM/R2 = 2cHo/{(1-Xn)(n+1)3}
 

For a present n=1.13242 ......{(1-Xn)(n+1)}3 = 4.073722736.. for M/R2 = constant = 2.48906
For the Milky Way barred spiral galaxy and a total BM+DM mass of 1.7x1042 kg, the mass distribution would infer a diameter of 1.6529x1021 m or 174,594 light years, inclusive the Dark Matter halo extension.


For the Andromeda barred spiral galaxy and a total BM+DM mass of 3x1042 kg, the galaxy's diameter would increase to 2.1957x1021 m or 231,930 light years for a total matter distribution.

 

hs-2012-25-a-print-554x580-.37627.
 

 

 

3.9. Newton's Gravitational Constant Measurements


The speed of light 'c' has been measured to an accuracy of 8 decimal places and Planck's Constant 'h' is known with an error not exceeding one part per million. This is not so for Newton's Gravitational Constant 'Big G'. The National Bureau of Standards (NBS) in Gaithersburg, Maryland, US began measuring 'G' in the 1930's to establish the Luther-Towler-Number LTN=6.67259x10-11 G-units (m³/kg.s²). So it stood until 1994, when the renowned PTB in Braunschweig, Germany's Standards Laboratory measured G much higher, differing in the 3rd decimal place.

Then New Zealand's Measurements Standard Laboratory published avalue significantly below the LTN and the University of Wuppertal derived a value in between the NZ one and the LTN. Notwithstanding the ever improving technological advances and measuring techniques; using torsion pendulums, tungsten cylinders or suspended or accelerating testmasses; 'Big G' has proven to be intractable to conformity. Two of the latest measurements are 6.67327x10-11 and 6.6742(10)x10-11 G-units and values by no means definitive.


What is going on? Shifting heavy objects in the vicinity of the test apparatus seems to influence the atomic structure of the testmasses, irrespective of the isolated environment created for the testing conditions. The following treatise shall resolve the conundrum and illustrate the unruly behaviour of 'G' as a consequence of the initial boundary conditions for the universe's subsequent evolvement. It shall indicate that even a 'massless' universe would contain a diminished G-component as the electric permittivity of a massless macroquantised (Hawking) BlackHole and that the present dilemma derives from a finestructure of the nucleonic constituents, which, by definition, must comprise the testmasses.

A precise measurement so would rely on an unambiguous calculation for two neutronic restmasses, a condition which we shall show to be unachievable, because of the nature and interrelationship between the parameters of inertial mass and those of electromagnetic charges. Now the ratio between the electromagnetic- and the gravitational interaction strengths is measured and of the order of alpha/G-alpha~10-39 and one can actually define the G-alpha as a function of alpha and as G-alpha=alpha18, using the string parameters of Quantum Relativity.


This defines the minimum neutronmass mc explicitely as: mc=√{ke².alpha17/Go}.


In string parameters, the unification condition for the interactions at the stringenergy scale demands kGo=1 for a mc=[e/Go].alpha8.5=9.9247246..x10-28 kg*. This represents so 58% of the neutron (or nucleon) mass as measured today and is the actual minimum neutron mass. Now the truly CONSTANT GM² structure in say Newton's Law, is given by the product Gomc²=1.094446..x10-64 Nm².


This however is finestructured in introducing a maximum neutron mass given in a unification condition, known as the Euler Identity: X+Y=XY=-1=i²=℮ and applying the absolute value of unitised 1. We write: Gomc²={GoXn+k}.{mcYn}.{mcYk}=Gm.mnmax.mnmin and where Gm is the actual G value as measured and which has proved difficult to do so in the laboratories. So the applied G value is: Gm(n)=Go.Xn+k and where n is a cycletime n=Hot for a nodal universe with dn/dt=Ho the nodal Hubble Constant Ho=c/Rmax for a Hubble radius Rmax.


The applied Gm so ALWAYS engages a maximised neutron mass (calculated as {mcYn}~ 1.7115x10-27 kg in string parameters for a present cycletime coordinate np=1.1324..) AND a minimised neutron mass (calculated as {mcYk}). The value of k is so determinative for Gm and differs over the evolution of the universe with respect to cycletime n and as finestructured for an AVERAGE G-value (Gav) obtained in using the geometric mean for the neutron masses in extremum (minmax productation).


One can easily calculate Gav=Go.Xn=6.44317..x10-11 G-units for a geometric neutron mass product of mnmax.mnmin=mc².Yn =1.69861...x10-54 kg² for the constancy condition of Gomc²=1.094446..x10-64 Nm² and omitting the k-factorisation. But this averaged G value applies for a massless universe under the initial unification condition of the finestructures described in Gok=1 or Go=4πεo (using Stoney Units for the Planck-Scaling of the chargequantum e).


So BECAUSE an initial mass seedling Mo={mc.mP/me}√E ~ 1.8137..x1051 kg* became transformed in the de Broglie phase inflation from its preinertial state as gravitational mass into the state of inertia (this is called the Big Bang for a spacetime quanta counter E); this 'Principle of Equivalence' introduced the hitherto massless 'ylemic' 'neutron bosons' as dineutronic states, which under the Higgs mechanism became fermionic and established the mass seedling Mo as the primordial neutron matter, then decaying via beta minus decay into the observed matter in the universe (there was no antimatter).


Subsequently the EMERGENCE of inertial mass under c-invariance also introduced a finestructure for 'G' as described in the above. One can determine the value of k from finestructuring the critical masses Mo, M and MHawking as boundary Black Hole masses coupled to the quantum minmax neutron masses. For curvature radius Rmax and the critical density ρc=M/Vmax=3Ho2/8πGo the Schwarzschild metric gives M=Rmax.c²/2Go=c³/2GoHo= ~ 6.47058..x1052 kg*.


For the curvature radius RSarkar=2GoMo/c2, we have the deceleration parameter qo=½Ωo=Mo/2M=2GoHoMo/c3 ~0.014015... and which so determines the 'missing mass' in the universe to be a consequence of the initial boundary conditions set by the de Broglie inflation and the overall Black Hole evolution of the stringed parameters.


From the minimum Planck Oscillator EPo=½hfP=½mPc2: ½MPTP={1/8p}MPTP.4p=H(awking)M(odulus)=HM HM=hc3/4pGok=MMinTMax=|c2/4p2|.MMax.Tss=Mo.To=M.T and for MMax=4p2kHM/c2hfss = pc/fssGo =2.5446..x1049 kg*

The Mass-Temperature modulus of Stephen Hawking determines MHawking=MMax/4p for a boundary condition of maximised Black Hole Mass for a minimised Black Hole Temperature in MHawkingTHawking= HM = 9.131793821x1023 (kg.K)* for (1/4π).HM = hc3/16π2Gok and k the Stefan-Boltzmann constant.


The relationship is given in superstring (Planck) parameters by Mmin.Tmax=|c/2π|².Mmax.Tmin=hc³/4πGok = (4π/8π)mP.TP and TP the Planck Temperature TP=mP.c²/k.
{(MHawking,THawking);(Mo),To);(M,T)} = {(2.03x1048 kg*,4.52x10-25K*);(1.81x1051 kg*,5.03x10-28 K*);(6.47x1052 kg*,1.41x10-29 K*)}


The Dragon Braned Frequency Modulation fps.fss = 1 = Unity A Primary SourceSink Eps in modular membrane duality with a Secondary SinkSource Ess Energy Prime SourceSink as White Hole|Quantum Entanglement Modular Duality|Energy Prime SinkSource as Black Hole


Curvature Radius RC = l/2π = c/2πf = c/w
Curvature Area ABlack Hole = A BH = 4πRC2 = 4π|c/2π|2.1/f2 = 4π|c/2π|2.1/fpsfss = |c2/π| for fps.fss = 1

 

For a 3D Volume (4π/3)R³, the 2D Area or Surface becomes dV/dR=4πR² and reducing to a 1D Line Integral of dA/dR=8πR=4.(2πR) as 4 times the perimeter of a circle of radius R and relating the Black Hole surface quantum as 4 Planck Areas LP² in its Entropy SBH =ABH/4LP² =πc³ABH/2Goh.


As the Unified Field of Quantum Relativity spans 1440° or 8π radians, the quantization of the Information located on the surface area of a Black Hole so introduces the factor of 4 in its formulation.


This sets the Hawking-Gibbons thermodynamic temperature minima for To=constant/Mo ~ 5.03..x10-28 K* and T=constant/M ~ 1.41..x10-29 K*. As the minimum macro Black Hole has Schwarzschild metric λmin/2π=2GoMmin/c² for Tmax=hfmax/k=hc/λmink; and modular duality requires the unification condition for the minimum curvature to relate to a maximum curvature in Rminmin/2π=1/Rmax or Rmax=2πλmax, as Rmin.Rmax=1.


In gauge bosonic string parameters, this modular duality then is given in Emax=hc/λmin=mmax.c²=kTmax and Emin=hc/λmax=mmin.c²=kTmin and in the invariance of the lightspeed parameter c as c=fmaxλmin=1/fminλmax or the dimensionless unification conditions: Emax.Emin=h² and Emax/Emin=fmax²=1/fmin²={c/λmin}²={c/2πRmin}²={cRmax/2π}²={cλmax}².


This gives a proportionality: mmax.Tmin=mmin.Tmax for the gauges, which is however modified in the dimensionless factor {c/2π}² for the Black Hole masses for the given temperatures, as bosonic masses describe bosonic Black Holes via E=kT and not the cosmological Black Holes of the Schwarzschild metric.


The c-invariance so uses modular duality in the quantum Black Hole limit c=fmaxλmin=2πfmaxRmin for fmin=c/λmax=c/2πRmax as an unmodulated frequency in Tmin=Emin/k=hc/2πkRmax=hc.λmin/4π²k=3.58856...x10-26 K* and a temperature above the Hawking-Gibbons limit as required.


This differs in a factor {2π/c}² from the lightspeed inversion in Tmin=hfmin/k and so 1.574x10-41 K*, which violates the Hawking-Gibbons boundaries in NOT using the modular duality and with fmin=1/fmax in frequency units and NOT inverted time units.


And so Mmin.Tmax=hc³/4πGok =½mP.TP=MHawking.kc2.Tss/π and the Hawking Mass is determined as Mmax=4πMHawking=πc²λmax/Go ~ 2.545x1049 kg*.


From the Black Hole 'Black Body Radiator' Temperature Spectra and Stefan's Constant s=2π5k4/15h3c2 (J/s.m2K4)*
Power PBH=4πRBH2sTBH4 = MBHc2/tHawking Evaporation and with TBH4=HM/MBH4 - (A 3D kinetic mass-energy distribution uses MBHc2/3 from PV=nkT=⅓Nmv2)


tHawking = c6/16πsGo2MBHTBH4 = 30,720π2Go2MBH3/hc4 = 15,360π.tP for LP = GoMP/c2 = ctP = c√{Goh/2πc5}
tHM = 120Go2MBH32hc4 = tHawking/{4π}4 = 60/π3.tP = 1.935..tP ~ 2tP (The actual Black Hole 'Evaporation Time' as a 'Doubling Cyclicity' for the cosmic evolution.)


For M and Mo and MHawking, the Hawking Evaporation times (without the Mother-Daughter BH Recharging derived following), then are: 2.32x10125 s* or 7.4x10117 years and 1.66x10134 s* or 5.3x10126 years and 7.46x10138 s* or 2.4x10131 years respectively.


Using the λminλmax=1 wavelength modulation in the T-duality of λmin=2πRmin=1/λmax=2π/Rmax, we can see, that this modulation closely approximates the geometric mean of the seedling mass in {1/4π}Mo2/2M.MMax=Mo2/8π.M.MHawking=3.2895..x10102/3.2931..x10102 ~ 0.9989...


This also circumscribes the actual to critical density ratio in the omega of the general relativistic treatment of the cosmologies. Now recall our applied G value in Gm(n)=Go.and apply our just derived Black Hole Mass modulation coupled to that of the quantum micromasses.


We had: Gomc²={GoXn+k}.{mcYn}.{mcYk}=Gm.mnmax.mnmin and where Gm is the actual G value as measured and which has proved difficult to do so in the laboratories. Gm(n)=Go.Xn+k=Gomc²/mnmax.mnmin=Gomc²/({mcYn}{mnmin}) and where we have mnmin=mcYk} for the unknown value of k.


So Gm(n)=Go.Xn+k=GoXn[mc/mnmin]=Go{mc2/mcYn}.{Mo2/8π.M.MHawking.mav}} and where now {mnmin}={mcYk}={8π.M.MHawking.mav/Mo2}=1.0011..mav. mav={Mo²/8π.M.MHawking}{mnmin}={Mo²/8π.M.MHawking}{mcYk}=0.9989..{mcYk} and obviously represents a REDUCED minimum mass mnmin=mcYk.


But the product of maximum and 'new' minimum now allows an actual finetuning to a MEASURED nucleon mass mN by: mN² = mavYn.mcYn=mav.mnmax.Yn.


So substituting for mav in our Gm expression, will now give the formulation: Gm(n)=Go.Xn+k=GoXn[mc/mnmin]=Go{mc2/mcYn}.{Mo2/8π.M.MHawking.mav} Gm(n)=Go.Xn+k=GoXn[mc/mnmin]=Go{mc2/mcYn}.{Mo2/8π.M.MHawking}{mcY2n/mN2} and where {Mo2/8π.M.MHawking = 0.9989..} Gm(n)=Go.{mc2/mN2}{Mo2/8π.M.MHawking}Yn


The average nucleon mass mN is upper bounded in the neutron mass and lower bounded in the proton mass, their difference being an effect of their nucleonic quark content, differing in the up-down transition and energy level.

For a Neutron Restmass of: mn=1.680717x10-27 kg* (941.6036 MeV*) the substitution (and using calibrations m=1.001671358 m*; s=1.000978395 s*; kg=1.003753127 kg* and C=1.002711702 C* gives G(np)=6.678764x10-11 (m3/kgs2) and a perturbation corrected mn=1.681100563x10-27 kg* (941.818626 MeV*) gives: mneutron = 1.67481477x10-27 kg


G(np) = Go{mc/mN}2.(0.9989..) = 6.67093x10-11 (m3/kgs2)* or 6.675547x10-11 (m³/kgs²).
The perturbation upper limit is given in the mn=1.681335x10-27 kg* (941.9506 MeV*) and gives: G(np) = Go{mc/mN}2.(0.9989..) = 6.6690685x10-11 (m3/kgs2)* or 6.673685x10-11 (m³/kgs²).


The average for the last two values then approximates as a 'best fit' for: Gm(np) = ½{6.67093x10-11 + 6.6690685x10-11} (m3/kgs2)* = 6.6699925x10-11 (m3/kgs2)* or Gm(np) = ½{6.675547x10-11 + 6.673685x10-11} (m3/kgs2) = 6.674816x10-11 (m3/kgs2)


This is a best-fit approximation, considering the uncharged nature of the testmasses. This then gives the value of k from Gm(n)=Go.Xn+k as k=ln(GmYn/Go)/lnX and which calculates as k= -0.073387..


Two protons (mp=1.6789x10-27 kg* (940.56 MeV*) would give: G(np)=6.6936x10-11 (m³/kgs²) and a proton-neutron pair would yield: G(np)=6.6791x10-11 (m3/kgs2); both of the latter values unsuitable because of the electrocharges increasing the intra-quarkian Magnetocharge coupling between the two mesonic rings of the neutron and the single mesonic ring in the proton's down- or KIR-quark.

The best approximation for 'Big G' hence depends on an accurate determination for the neutron's inertial mass, only fixed as the base nucleon minimum mass at the birth of the universe. A fluctuating Neutron mass would also result in deviations in 'G' independent upon the sensitivity of the measuring equipment. The inducted mass difference in the protonic-and neutronic restmasses, derives from the Higgs-Restmass-Scale and can be stated in a first approximation as the groundstate. Basic nucleon restmass is mc=√Omega.mP=9.9247245x10-28 kg*.


(Here Omega is a gauge string factor coupling in the fundamental force interactions as: Cuberoot(Alpha):Alpha:Cuberoot(Omega):Omega and for Omega=G-alpha.) KKK-Kernelmass=Up/Down-HiggsLevel=3x319.62 MeV*=958.857 MeV*, usingthe Kernel-Ring and Family-Coupling Constants.
Subtracting the Ring-VPE (3L) gives the basic nucleonic K-State as 939.642 MeV*. This includes the electronic perturbation.


For the Proton,one adds one (K-IR-Transition energy) and for theNeutron one doubles this to reflect the up-down-quark differential.


Proton mp=u.d.u=K.KIR.K=(939.6420+1.5013-0.5205)MeV*=940.6228 MeV*. Neutron mn=d.u.d=KIR.K.KIR=(939.6420+3.0026-1.0410)MeV*=941.6036 MeV*.


This is the groundstate from the Higgs-Restmass-Induction-Mechanismand reflects the quarkian geometry as being responsible for theinertial mass differential between the two elementary nucleons. All groundstate elementary particle masses are computed from theHiggs-Scale and then become subject to various finestructures. Overall, the MEASURED gravitational constant 'G' can be said to be decreasing over time.


The ratio given in k is GmYn/Go~0.60073... and so the present G-constant is about 60% of the one at the Planck Scale. G decreases nonlinearly, but at a present rate of 0.60073/19.11x109 per year, which calculates as 3.143..x10-11 G-units per year.


Generally using the exponential series expansion, one can indicate the change in G. For Xn+k=z=exp[(n+k)lnX] by (n+k)lnX=lnz for the value Z=(n+k)lnX=-0.481212(n+k); z transforms in exponential expansion ex=1+x+x2/2!+x3/3!+x4/4!+...


For a function f(n)=z=Gm(n)/Go=Xn+k f(n)=1-(0.481.)(n+k)+(0.231.)(n+k)2/2-(0.111.)(n+k)3/6+(0.053.)(n+k)4/24-...+...
For 4th order with n=1.1324.. and k=0 (for a purely electromagnetic universe of zero mass content where the curvature derives from the gravitational mass equivalent of the Equivalence Principle of General Relativity): f(1.1324.)=1-0.545+0.148-0.027+0.004-...+...~0.580


So the gravitational Gm(1.1324)=(0.580)Go=Go.X1.1324~6.444x10-11 (m3/kgs2). At timeinstantenuity of the Quantum Big Bang, n=npsps/Rmax=6.2591x10-49~0 Then GBigBang=GoXnps=Go (to 50 decimal places distinguishing the timeinstanton from the Nulltime as the Planck-Time transform).


For our previously calculated k=ln(GmYn/Go)/lnX and which calculates as k= -0.073387.. f(n)=1-(0.481.)(n+k)+(0.231.)(n+k)2/2-(0.111.)(n+k)3/6+(0.053.)(n+k)4/24-...+... for f(1.1324)=1-0.509+0.129-0.0220+0.0028-...+...~0.601 to fourth order approximation.


Hence, the gravitational constant assumes a value of about 61% of its Big Bang initialisation and calculates as 6.675x10-11 G-units for a present cycletime npresent=Hotpresent=1.1324...


The introduction of the mass seed coupling between the macroquantum Mo and the microquantum mc=mPalpha9 (from the gravitational finestructure unification) PERTURBS the 'purely electromagnetic' cosmology in the perturbation factor k and increases the purely electromagnetic Gmemr in the black hole physics described.


So gravity appears stronger when one 'looks back in time' or analyses cosmological objects at large distances. The expansion parameter (a) in the Friedmann-Einstein standard cosmology can be rewritten as a curvature ratio R(n)/Rmax={n/(n+1)} and describes the asymptotic universe in say 10 dimensions evolving under the inertial parameters of the c-invariance. This 'lower dimensional universe' is open and expands under hyperbolic curvature under the deceleration parameter qo=½Ωo=Mo/2M=2GoHoMo/c³ ~0.014015... This open universe is bounded in the 'standing wave' of the Hubble Oscillation of the 11D and 'higher dimensional universe'.


The boundary is given in the omega of the 'missing mass' of the volumes, which differ in a factor of V11/V10=nRmax³/(n/(n+1))³Rmax³=(n+1)³/n²=DIM-Factor (and which assumes its minimum for one complete oscillation for n=2 as DIM=27/4=6.75 so 14.7 Billion years from the present). Presently, for n=1.132419.. DIM=7.561.. and so the 'missing mass' will be measured as a 'dark matter' distribution of 'dark haloes' etc. around the luminous matter given in the ylemic mass seedling Mo of the baryonic matter.


As Mo is just 2.8% of M, but is subject to a 'growth' in the maximising factor Yn=1.724.. for the present epoch, one can take the factor Mav==Mo.√Yn=1.313.. for a 'dark matter' percentage upper bounded in 2.8%(1.724)~4.83% and lower bounded in 2.8%(1.313)~3.68%.


But so 7.56 open universes are contained within the closed and spherical universe given in the Hubble bound. And the 'dark matter' will be 7.56 times the luminous baryonic matter in the interval {27.82%, 36.51%} as percentage of the total energy of closure for Ωo=1 and the critical density ρc=M/Vmax=3Ho²/8πGo.
Our Big Bang happened at the modular time 1/fmax=tmin=fmin=3.33..x10-31 seconds*, coinciding with the end of the stringed inflation epoch of the standard cosmology.


The 'de Broglie' inflation established the crucial boundary parameters as say given in the Mo and M Black Hole masses described.


As the baryonic mass seedling Mo sets the Sarkar Scale for the cosmic architecture in the size of galactic superclusters as the limit for the gravitationally interacting systems before cosmic homogeneity; there must be a Black Hole evolution superposed onto the expansion of the 10D universe and the oscillation of the 11D universe which 'adds' a 'electromagnetic' volume of 2π²Rmax³ at the Hubble nodes every 16.9 Billion years.


In terms of the dimensional 'intersection' this can be described as a 'Strominger Brane' evolution with the Sarkar Scale set at the instanton, decreasing as a 'shrinking' Black Hole until it becomes massless at the wormhole scale defined in the minimum macro Black Hole λmin/2π=2GoMmin/c²=1.591549..x10-23 metres*.


This then resets the bosonic micro Black Holes with their macro counterparts under the modular duality. This Black Hole evolution is higher dimensional and purely electromagnetic, not being observable due to its noninertial nature, except the so called 'dark matter' and 'dark energy' scenarios of the boundary- and initial conditions. This can lead to a feasible model for the phenomenon of consciousness.

The process will take place in a DIM factor of about 234.5 as: Mmin.YN=M and for N=ln(M/Mmin)/lnY~234.5 and so in 16.9x234.5 Billion years, which are about 4 Trillion years.
The addition of inertia to a purely electromagnetic monopolic cosmology then varies the value of Newton's gravitational constant G as a function of the micro-macro evolution of the Black Holes and renders the applicable local G-constant as mensuration dependent on the precision measurement for the basic nucleon mass mcYn for a local epoch-cycle coordinate n=Hot. rpsYn=RH then defines nrecharge =ln[RH/rps]/ln[Y] ~ 234.472 or about 3.9628 Trillion years.


This then shows, that you are living within a Mother Black Hole, you choose to call the universe you reside in. This your 'World of Mother Nature' had a beginning in space and in time in the creation of the same. Your universe so EMERGED from a prior state of beingness, where there was no space and no time as defined in any arbitrary model terrestrial or extraterrestrial. This prior state of existence you can term either as a Eternal state of all consciousness or as a state of the non-spacial and non-temporal Void as a quasi state of 'nothingness'.


This, your observed universe so came into existence in using particular initial- and boundary conditions, which became requirements for space and time measurements to become possible. You may call this a relativistic metric spacetime continuum of discretization in minimum-maximum modular membrane duality however unified in the field properties of the dyadic monadicity of this string duality.


The size of your universe and its energy, then became defined in those boundary conditions and particularly in a 'Daughter Black Hole' being born from the womb of its 'Mother Black Hole'. Mathematical proportionalities then aligned the masses and the scales of Mother and Daughter as the initial hyperacceleration or inflationary tachyonic phase transition of the initializing wormhole singularity of Abba, the Little Serpent to the Unified Field parameters of the thermodynamic classically relativistic expansion of the universe. The 'daughter' became the seed within the 'mother' for the Protoverse and the Seedling Universe for all generations of universes, whose interaction would allow phaseshifted multiverses to become born from the original protoverse, albeit encompassed by the omniverse of AbbaBaab.


As one cycle of the 'Mother's Heartbeat' requires about two times 16.9 Billion years or so 33.8 Billion years to complete its integral n-cyclicity; the lower dimensional universe evolves both within its 10-dimensional string timespace and its 11-dimensional membrane timespace. The 10-D evolution of the cosmos so allows the 'mother' to birth its 'daughter' , when the lightspeed restricted thermodynamic universal expansion has completed its first cyclicity for n=1 so 2.2 Billion years ago and synchronizing the becoming of 'selfaware' of the 'life potential' residing within the womb of the 'mother'. 2.2 Billion years ago then, the original 'light ray of Creator Abba' 'caught up' and reached its 11-D Mirror Boundary of the 'Cosmic Mother' from its 10-D Wormhole timespace quantum singularity or source point.


This 'signal then both reflected back into the INSIDE of the 11-D Membrane-Womb of the 'mother' and refracted OUTSIDE in extending its own boundary set by the hyperacceleration of the de Broglien inflationary phase transition.
Every cycle count then increases the scale of the wormhole 'White Hole Father Source' in the same proportion the 'Mother Black Hole Mother Sink' decreases, until after 234.5 cycles or about 4,000 Billion years the original Mother-Daughter scale proportionality resets itself in reseeding the then populated omniverse in terms of the spacetime quanta count fractalized by and in the definition of the Abba-Baab Little Serpent Father -Big Dragon Mother itself.


For about 2 trillion years, the Omniverse as 'The Universal Bodywave' is INHALING or 'breathing in' analogous to 'feeding or charging' a battery or some body requiring energy. Then for another 2 trillion years the omniverse is EXHALING or 'breathing out' in analogy to a 'battery discharging' or a 'fed body' 'burning its stored energy'.


The Omniverse after 4 trillion years so completes its asymptotic evolution with respect to its initial conception or insemination of the 10-D Daughter reaching maturity as her own 11-D Mother. The defining proportionality parameters of the scales and energy distributions for cycle parameter n=1 then transfer to a new initializing value at n=234.5 to redefine the maximum masses and sizes for the 'New GrandMother Black Hole' attaining the now evolved 'Infinity Mass' n.M and a 'New Mother Black Hole' n.Mo and so for the 'Old Mother' graduating to become a 'Mother of Mothers' and the 'Old Daughter' graduating to be a 'Mother of Daughters'.

Every 4 trillion years a 'Recharge Inflation' so Recreates/Resets the original creation event with a Quantization of the initial condition and boundary parameters in the original Hubble Node for cycletime n=1 in the factor n/(n/[n+1])=n+1 and so the 'Strominger' massless Black Hole coordinate of nStrominger=234.472 assuming the nps=lps/RHubble coordinate as its next initialisation value.

The asymptotic completion coordinate for the Curvature Radius R(n)=RHubble.n/[n+1] so evolves in a linear time factor as Delta-n = 1-{n/[n+1]}=1/[n+1] to magnify and extend the completion factor in tandem with the expansion of the multidimensionally expanding cosmology.

 

Poetic and philosophical Musing:

This then defines the 'Generation Cycle Parameter' for the Omniversal Self-Reproduction in the 'Family of Abba the Little Serpent Creator Fatherhood' and Baab the Great Dragon Creation Motherhood in AbbaBaab the Cosmic Twin of SourceSink and White Hole CreatorCreation entwined with itself as a Black Hole CreationCreator.
stoney6.
 

The Cyclic Universe, so 'rebangs' itself every 4 Trillion years or so to ensure its continuation of selfexploration and by interdimensional civilisations defined in multiverses, each of which is required to be seeded in a prototypical template universe as mirror holofractal of itself.


Without the Dark Matter Omega WDM - Baryon Matter WB at the n=√2=1.414.. or 23.87 Gyear cycle coordinate; the gravitational constancy of Gomc²=1.094446..x10-64 Nm² would result in a very small Gav=GoXn~1.463x10-105 G-units, compensated by a 'mass-evolved' universe with mcYn~7.535..x1067 kg*.

The general form for this 'universal evolution energy' can be physically modelled as 'cosmic consciousness' defined in the 'awareness' df/dt minimised in fmin² and maximised in fmax² and as a form of radial displacement independent angular acceleration acting on spacetime volumars defined in the classical electron diameter (2Re) times c² defining the magnetocharge e* as inversion of the Big Bang base parameter of the wormhole energy quantum Emax=1/e*=1/2Rec² for a Planck Constant finestructure h=λmin/e*c.

This "Strominger brane' evolution avoids the so called 'heat death' of the universe in a form of 'recharging' and coincides with the projected 'running out' of stellar nuclear fuel of the transformation of the elements within stars in the stellar evolution scenarios.


The entire cosmology is underpinned by a Black Hole evolution, which incorporates the quantum geometric microcosmos and the geometric relativistic macrocosmos simultaneously - all for the 'cosmic purpose' to manifest 'evolved mass' as 'consciousness' or 'dark light' or antiradiation.

 

Poetic and philosophical Musing:

The many string parameters indicated give then a rigorous scientific definition for the concept of God as a supermembrane, eternally (meaning asymptotically approaching unity in linear time) entwined in quantum entanglement in a lower-dimensional coupling with the Anti-God. Besides this Physicalized God-Anti-God/Godess Duality, there also exists the metaphysical and purely imaginary God in exile.

This metaphysical-mathematical God-Creator|Creation-doG in Exile is the Oneness of all of you and all of your ancestors and of all of your linear descendants. One day, you all shall become more aware of this scientific fact - your exile is the exile of your imaginary energies unrealised in divers forms.
IAmWhatIAm - Nothing, One and Everything! --- Abraxasinas a Bifurcated Tongue FOR the Little Serpent!
stoney6.
 

multiverse.
neutrinoweakon.