I bought your audiobook for Einstein's Intuition and its my favorite explanation for many things like dark matter, quantum tunneling and "collapse" of wave functions for "observed" particles.
So, what this concept is suggesting is that the fundamental forces and matter that make up the universe are naturally drawn towards a balance, but the balance can be affected and distorted by outside forces. The accuracy of the equation still works with the quarts, but the quarts are affected differently by outside forces than the electron, muon, and tau. This could be the reason for the change in answers when applying the equation to quarts. Maybe the difference between the two values is significant as well? The numerical difference between the value given when the equation is applied to leptons and the value given when the equation is applied to quarts could be an indicator of what these forces are and how they affect the matter. I actually just came to this video after watching your Ted Talk on visualizing 11 dimensions, and I’m thinking that other dimensions could have a role in this riddle. There have to be forces and matter that we cannot even comprehend yet; things so beyond human understanding that we will have to evolve just to examine them. Really interesting idea, and it makes me feel like I know nothing about the inner workings of reality. What do you think?
Thad, Thank you for bringing this important relationship to my attention. I have some thoughts about it. I had previously been hesitant to engage with you because of your deep connection with emotions. Erroneously, I took this to indicate your analytical side was compromised. Your superb presentation on 11 dimensions changed my view. In the spirit of full disclosure, I do not have a good basis in QM. I also do not know the precise structure of the muon or tau particles. Hence, these comments should be a taken with more than a grain of sand. My expertise falls in what I call metaphysical reality. QM reality would be the bridge between metaphysical reality and physical reality on which our experiences are based. The Koide equation bears a close resemblance to the diagonal of a cube with the diagonal and each side consisting of integer values. I think there may be a reason for this resemblance. First, I'm going to take a side trip into QM, an area in which I lack expertise. The metaphysical structure of space requires synchronization between individual strands in order for any event propagation to occur. One may think of synchronization as requiring events to occur in some multiple of a unit. An event may only propagate into one strand of attached space unless a precise portion can be split off into a second strand. The precise portion must be such that both strands contain some multiple of the underlying units. Since energy must also be conserved, at least in the complete wave, we have relationships that resemble the Koide equation where both the sides and the diagonal must be integral. It seems conceivable, albeit quite speculative, that the Born Rule may have a similar basis. It is not possible to measure something without interacting with it on some level. This interaction would need to follow the relationships discussed. Hence, the measuring process in part determines the outcome. Thus, the cat is what we make it to be, dead or alive. In the case of the Koide equation, the relationships may exist because the particles are related very directly by a decay process. The precise integer relationship (assuming it is not an approximation) give us an important clue to consider. In the absence of knowing the precise structure of the muon and tau particles, these comments remain in the speculative realm. Richard
You mean like at 3:43? I believe it's to emphasize the common exponent in the numerator and the denominator. Also, the square of the mass is considered the fundamental property, so keep it in that form makes sense in that regard. But you're right, it's not exactly in simplified form lol.
Just a few days ago, I found myself explaining the 11-dimensional map to a friend who was using the term "dimension" in a very unscientific way haha. Literally not a day goes by that I don't think about the information that I learned from reading your book. I just randomly decided to check out your site and see what you're up to, and I found a link to this video. Very interesting! For the purposes of the riddle, what do you mean by "running mass?" I know that's a technical term, but I want to be sure before I indulge in thought experiments. From context, I'm inferring that running mass is the stable mass that is maintained indefinitely, which could be different from what is initially measured at the particle's creation or destruction. I also imagine that the measurements themselves greatly affect the results for such light particles, and the running mass is what we would observe if we could cancel out that interference. Am I on the right track? However, is the reported measurement based on theoretical understanding or observed measurements? I would expect that we could calculate the mass from mathematical models to get a more accurate running mass than we are able to detect -- one free of interference from our measuring devices. Yes? No? Thanks for all of the joy and sanity that you've brought to my life!
I am not a mathematician. I would like to see a visual of the calculations of the cube roots →♾ roots of all the particles plugged into the equation, right or wrong. Sometimes form is a clue.
Have you considered the quantized space needed to form a standing wave and is there a risk of instability associated with occupying larger volumes of planck space and larger amounts of other quantized values which causes a smaller 'object' to be more prevalent? Also is temperature the 'connectivity' between 'space' such that an 'object' can move around easier (because there are more routes)? I intuited the limit of lightspeed as due to the max energy that can be stored in 'compressed' space (like the max energy you can store in a compressed spring) but if you quantify time it means is a binary process of the energy filling the space and then transitioning to the next space. How does this mesh with the em wave understanding of light?
Mass is just like distance in the point like space, so you can apply the concept of gravitation √of the distance. Mass is the representation in our 3d space, of the distance between the point like plack particles that compose space-time.
"If we want to explain the masses, or the relationship between the masses, where will we start?" Can the Heisenberg uncertainty principle be generalized to a Heisenberg-Koide-Lestone uncertainty principle that enables string theory to explain the free parameters of the Standard Model of particle physics? Can the amplituhedron be used to justify Lestone's theory of virtual cross sections? As of June 19, 2021, the Wikipedia article “W and Z bosons” gives the W-boson mass (for both W+ & W-) as 80.379 ± .012 GeV/c^2 and the Z-boson mass as 91.1876 ± .0021 GeV/c^2 . According to Wolfram Alpha, ( 2 * 80.379 + 91.1876) / (2 * squareroot (80.379) + squareroot (91.1876))^2 = .333634… ( 1 * 80.379 + 91.1876) / (1 * squareroot (80.379) + squareroot (91.1876))^2 = .5004971…
![Seungmin "그렇게, 천천히, 우리(As we are)" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kAzmhLHePqU/mqdefault.jpg)
I bought your audiobook for Einstein's Intuition and its my favorite explanation for many things like dark matter, quantum tunneling and "collapse" of wave functions for "observed" particles.
So, what this concept is suggesting is that the fundamental forces and matter that make up the universe are naturally drawn towards a balance, but the balance can be affected and distorted by outside forces.
The accuracy of the equation still works with the quarts, but the quarts are affected differently by outside forces than the electron, muon, and tau. This could be the reason for the change in answers when applying the equation to quarts. Maybe the difference between the two values is significant as well? The numerical difference between the value given when the equation is applied to leptons and the value given when the equation is applied to quarts could be an indicator of what these forces are and how they affect the matter.
I actually just came to this video after watching your Ted Talk on visualizing 11 dimensions, and I’m thinking that other dimensions could have a role in this riddle. There have to be forces and matter that we cannot even comprehend yet; things so beyond human understanding that we will have to evolve just to examine them. Really interesting idea, and it makes me feel like I know nothing about the inner workings of reality.
What do you think?
Thad, Thank you for bringing this important relationship to my attention. I have some thoughts about it. I had previously been hesitant to engage with you because of your deep connection with emotions. Erroneously, I took this to indicate your analytical side was compromised. Your superb presentation on 11 dimensions changed my view.
In the spirit of full disclosure, I do not have a good basis in QM. I also do not know the precise structure of the muon or tau particles. Hence, these comments should be a taken with more than a grain of sand.
My expertise falls in what I call metaphysical reality. QM reality would be the bridge between metaphysical reality and physical reality on which our experiences are based.
The Koide equation bears a close resemblance to the diagonal of a cube with the diagonal and each side consisting of integer values. I think there may be a reason for this resemblance. First, I'm going to take a side trip into QM, an area in which I lack expertise.
The metaphysical structure of space requires synchronization between individual strands in order for any event propagation to occur. One may think of synchronization as requiring events to occur in some multiple of a unit. An event may only propagate into one strand of attached space unless a precise portion can be split off into a second strand. The precise portion must be such that both strands contain some multiple of the underlying units.
Since energy must also be conserved, at least in the complete wave, we have relationships that resemble the Koide equation where both the sides and the diagonal must be integral. It seems conceivable, albeit quite speculative, that the Born Rule may have a similar basis. It is not possible to measure something without interacting with it on some level. This interaction would need to follow the relationships discussed. Hence, the measuring process in part determines the outcome. Thus, the cat is what we make it to be, dead or alive.
In the case of the Koide equation, the relationships may exist because the particles are related very directly by a decay process. The precise integer relationship (assuming it is not an approximation) give us an important clue to consider.
In the absence of knowing the precise structure of the muon and tau particles, these comments remain in the speculative realm.
Richard
Why are the terms in the numerator written as square roots squared? Isn't it just the sum of the masses over the sum of their square roots squared?
You mean like at 3:43? I believe it's to emphasize the common exponent in the numerator and the denominator. Also, the square of the mass is considered the fundamental property, so keep it in that form makes sense in that regard. But you're right, it's not exactly in simplified form lol.
Just a few days ago, I found myself explaining the 11-dimensional map to a friend who was using the term "dimension" in a very unscientific way haha. Literally not a day goes by that I don't think about the information that I learned from reading your book. I just randomly decided to check out your site and see what you're up to, and I found a link to this video. Very interesting!
For the purposes of the riddle, what do you mean by "running mass?" I know that's a technical term, but I want to be sure before I indulge in thought experiments. From context, I'm inferring that running mass is the stable mass that is maintained indefinitely, which could be different from what is initially measured at the particle's creation or destruction. I also imagine that the measurements themselves greatly affect the results for such light particles, and the running mass is what we would observe if we could cancel out that interference. Am I on the right track?
However, is the reported measurement based on theoretical understanding or observed measurements? I would expect that we could calculate the mass from mathematical models to get a more accurate running mass than we are able to detect -- one free of interference from our measuring devices. Yes? No?
Thanks for all of the joy and sanity that you've brought to my life!
I am not a mathematician. I would like to see a visual of the calculations of the cube roots →♾ roots of all the particles plugged into the equation, right or wrong. Sometimes form is a clue.
Have you considered the quantized space needed to form a standing wave and is there a risk of instability associated with occupying larger volumes of planck space and larger amounts of other quantized values which causes a smaller 'object' to be more prevalent? Also is temperature the 'connectivity' between 'space' such that an 'object' can move around easier (because there are more routes)? I intuited the limit of lightspeed as due to the max energy that can be stored in 'compressed' space (like the max energy you can store in a compressed spring) but if you quantify time it means is a binary process of the energy filling the space and then transitioning to the next space. How does this mesh with the em wave understanding of light?
Interesting Thad!
Mass is just like distance in the point like space, so you can apply the concept of gravitation √of the distance.
Mass is the representation in our 3d space, of the distance between the point like plack particles that compose space-time.
the square of (the square root of a given number) is inherently equal to the original number.
This is Pythagoras for 3 dimensions.
In the time of Mandela and Mengle Effects, trying not to forget Mandala networks.
"If we want to explain the masses, or the relationship between the masses, where will we start?" Can the Heisenberg uncertainty principle be generalized to a Heisenberg-Koide-Lestone uncertainty principle that enables string theory to explain the free parameters of the Standard Model of particle physics? Can the amplituhedron be used to justify Lestone's theory of virtual cross sections?
As of June 19, 2021, the Wikipedia article “W and Z bosons” gives
the W-boson mass (for both W+ & W-) as 80.379 ± .012 GeV/c^2 and
the Z-boson mass as 91.1876 ± .0021 GeV/c^2 .
According to Wolfram Alpha, ( 2 * 80.379 + 91.1876) / (2 * squareroot (80.379) + squareroot (91.1876))^2 = .333634…
( 1 * 80.379 + 91.1876) / (1 * squareroot (80.379) + squareroot (91.1876))^2 = .5004971…
Reminds me of the foundation of quantum physics. planck, etc.