String Theories and the Hierarchy Problem

String Theories and the Hierarchy Problem

Lubos posted on the hierarchy problem yesterday and put up a great video on the Higgs particle. It cleared a couple of things up as to how the physicists see the standard model (with the exception of Rowlands who suggests the Higgs is one of many spots in the periodic table of the particles- with the suggestion that the gravino fits in there somewhere and that from this view we might achieve grand unification with hbar c G and charge the fundamental constants. In both Lubos and Rowlands I am amazed at how in the intricate formulas we wind up with integer numbers as if matter has building block levels and between them there are some modifications or adjustments- in this respect the hierarachy problem as I understand it and Lubos presented it is a godsend rather than a problem on how we derive the masses of things with such unnatural balances of numbers. I simply do not buy that zero points (ie field points virtual or not) are totally discrete and totally random especially if these models cannot be reduced to sensible and intelligible Newtonian ones (as Rowlands suggests in his methods with the addition of some small things and the suggestion that U(5) may be the place for grand unification.)

Oddly I was leaning toward this sort of problem in my cube game presentations- only now I feel more sure my speculations have a sound basis. Eddingtons 136 or 137 ultimately is the same hierarachy problem. I note in Rowlands 2592 as applied to some idea of a Higgs like particle and cannot fail to note it is 32 x 81. Thus the center of the solitaire game if it is open or not, if it is multiple or not, is the source, especially amplified source of the complex numbers at the infinitesimal as if a radio amplifier circuit, It is a "source point" to the discrete field of background numbers of this remarkable property of orthogonality and its simple arithmetic in many dimensions. I disagree with the background of things not being also in places an absolute vacuum- the video said there is no such vacuum when the world is filled with virtual particles coming in and out of existence. Also Lubos is most likely right on the value of said Higgs particles. Let us not forget also Dirac used the square root differntials as operators unto some such number of things like say 136- but did Lubos in his example of 163 take that from some theory or was it arbritary- it looks familiar. Indeed, it may mean something from a four space view that 136 + 27 (again the string degrees of freedom) is this very example.

So, with the video fresh on my mind I wrote the following as a statement of principles, and I also tried a Spencerian sonnet but could not bring it to perfection at all as if there is a sea change in my level of writing or thinking once seeing these beautiful theories:

Quasized Dimensionality and Source-Field Mass (Distinguishing zero 0 and 00 points)

*0 - A field point source does not know what quasicallity projected field dimension it is in and may in fact be structurally bound between such representation vector like or may shift between them to actually define and measure something continuous as discrete mass.

*1 - From some perspective beyond the probabilistic idea of virtual particles the phaneron background can be absolute vacuum. In contrast to physicality continuously engaged, certain laws such as the Lorentz group space and multiple slit experiments (see newscientistcom yesterday) are complete universal descriptions where the vacuum is independent and can be quasi-filled.

*2 Would a Higg's-like particle cycle by directed dualism (points to lines?) shift between the five Coxeter delta-n honeycombs but as a physical possibility and description be akin to the 1/2 thermodynamic entropy law (Rowlands) (I wish I could access the extensions of the thermodynamic laws the founder of sciencechatforum saw fit to move or erase- just what was it I said about a fourth law as well the zeroth and double zeroth law and nth law?)

*4 Does this shift, consideration of mass and mechanism to explain it independent, not apply transitively symmetrically at every spatial-temporal point for at least 5! cross brane varieties?

*5 On the same 120 spherical division (and recall that what we hold as conservation laws by symmetry is really half a law, that is in the quantum fields things are half conserved of matter energy- even that law falls, especially at supposed origins as grand source) in each reflected region simply connected may we not find another such sphereical region and so on...?

* * *

I wonder if English can no longer be contained in the sonnet form so no matter how perfect that form comes near it must in notions and feelings be the sea change surpassed- or maybe I am getting infertile and old.

Maybe the act of writing and sorting this crude attempt at a Spencerian sonnet (and forget the iambic pentameter as it is enough to count the syllables) that may one day seem profound and I may understand it as some breakthrough of strange and original mood hinting as a notion we dame near. Or it must practice and busywork way out of practice with forgotten and neglected mental resources now limited and wounded by loss and rendered obsolete by my heart in understandable reaction to new awakened understanding of cosmology now far from the possibility of tragic love, poems then not so much about cosmology when cosmology is the poetry and love's longing in itself...? Only in retrospect do I see in a line or two of my early poems something startlingly profound that seemed unclear at the time. Very much like the creative in physics or hope for that mystery in an object of romantic love.

Superconduction Supercollider (For Your Love, Pedestrian Hitchhiker) L. Edgar Otto july 22 2010


What was bound in Heaven let no man break
Drawn apart in dreams colliding genders
By doing nothing win the fight, forsake
Our hearts taking the jolts of fender benders
Survive the lean while Love's heat fat renders
As our chain mail takes dints and scars of stars
Trapped in fate to lesser love surrenders
Comfort laughing at other's bumper cars
Immune to pain ourselve's electric fires
At the cross road each with right of way turns
Until our shells we mar without spar tires
Sideswiped that all must fall, everyone burns
I like your chipmunk teeth and parrot beak
Love walks, rides doomed, of it God does not speak.

* * *