wlad Posted March 6, 2023 Report Posted March 6, 2023 (edited) Professor José Abdala Helayel is a researcher of the Centro Brasileiro de Pesquisas Físicas - CBPF (Brazilian Center of Physics Research). I sent him an email yesterday, saying the following (translation to English by Google): ==============00============== Dear Prof Helayel Nobel Laureate in Physics Steven Weinberg expressed his opinion (at a time when physicists were still hopeful that Supersymmetry would be detected in LHC experiments) about the state of quantum theory at that time, in these words: “Perhaps a replacement for today’s quantum theory will come together any time now. Or perhaps not. Maybe it’s just the way we express the theory is bad and the theory itself is right. Or possibly a surprise is in store. There’s always a third possibility, that’s there’s something else entirely, that we’re going to have a revolution in science which is as much of a break with the past as quantum mechanics is a break from classical physics. That’s a possibility. It may be that a paper from a graduate student tomorrow morning will lay it out. By definition I don’t know what that would be.” In the opinion of the Nobel Prize, theoretical physics at that time was already threatened by the need to be reassessed. Many years after these words by Weinberg, in 2014 the Nobel Prize in Physics David Gross expressed his opinion on what represented the failure to confirm Supersymmetry at the LHC, in 2012: “In the absence of any positive experimental evidence for supersymmetry, it’s a good time to scare the hell out of the young people in the audience and tell them: ‘Don’t follow your elders—Go out and look for something new and crazy and powerful and different. Different, especially.’ That’s definitely a good lesson. But I’m too old for that.” Humm... “Something new and crazy and powerful and different. Different, especially”... words that reflected how much the crisis has worsened, after what Steven Weinberg said about the state of quantum physics. Today many must be following the advice of David Gross, looking for a solution through a revolutionary theory that is something new, crazy, powerful, and different. But certainly everyone who is undertaking this quest is making this attempt through the current foundations on which Modern Physics was developed. And among these foundations is the fundamental principle on which Modern Physics was developed: the principle of symmetry. However what if this path is not successful, and the new crazy theories that are proposed require that other crazier theories still be developed? What will be the future of Modern Physics, through this scenario? In 2013, the European Physical Journal C published the article The quantum vacuum as the origin of the speed of light, in which the authors proposed the hypothesis of the existence of pairs of fermions in the quantum vacuum, and proposed an experiment that could prove this hypothesis. In 2021 the peer-reviewed journal Physics Essays published my article Calculation of proton charges from the electric charges of the fermions of the quantum vacuum, in which the electric charge of the fermions of the quantum vacuum is calculated, and from this charge the charge was calculated of the proton, obtaining the value e = 1.6026×10−19 C, which is very close to the experimental e = 1.60218×10−19 C. What I would like to know is whether there is currently technology through which an experiment can be carried out capable of detecting the value of the electric charge of these quantum vacuum fermions, whose value calculated in my article is e0 = 5.06532 × 10−45 C. If this technology is available, and if the experience is confirmed, imagine the repercussions this will have for the future of Modern Physics. For that suggestion of David Gross (that the crisis in physics must be solved through a crazy theory) could be replaced by the suggestion of Steven Weinberg, that "there is always a third possibility". And this third possibility is perhaps contained exactly in what I have been proposing in my work, if the experiments confirm the charge e0 = 5.06532 × 10−45 C of the quantum vacuum fermions (those that have a charge, as there are others that have other properties). It is the future of Modern Physics that is at stake. So, dear Prof. Helayel, I would like to know his opinion. Or, if you are not the most qualified person to answer my question (about whether there is a technology today to measure this charge of quantum vacuum fermions), surely you will know some experimental physicist who has an answer to this question. I am sending as an attachment, in PDF, the article Calculation of proton charges from the electric charges of the fermions of the quantum vacuum. Best Regards Wladimir Guglinski ==============00============== Dr. Helayel sent me the following reply today morning (translation by Google): ==============00============== Hi Wladimir! Thank you for your text with a clear exposition of ideas. About the virtual fermions of the quantum vacuum, perhaps what the most recent and close to what you want is the super-LASER of Shanghai (SULF = Shanghai Ultra LASER Facilities), which operates in the Peta-Watt region and brings very strong electric and magnetic fields. intense. What is expected is that you can "break the vacuum" and generate currents of pairs coming out of the vacuum. Once these measurements currents, it would reach what you are trying to measure. Go to the SO SULF website. Attached here are slides from a seminar that I gave at UFU. See only slide 4, where I leave two references that speak of the SULF. Are not yet what I told you about breaking the vacuum, but they already give details of this super-LASER. See also super-LASER ELI: Extreme Light Infrastructure. Perhaps, with these super-LASERs, what you propose will be achieved measure. Hug, Helayel. ==============00============== Then today I sent an email to SULF, as seen below: ==============00============== Wladimir Guglinski <[email protected]> To:[email protected],[email protected],[email protected] Sun, Mar 5 at 5:44 PM Dear professors Dr. Xiaoyan Liang Dr. Yuxin Leng Dr. Ruxin Li Dr. Zhizhan Xu In March 2013 the European Physical Journal C published the article The quantum vacuum as the origin of the speed of light , in which is proposed an experiment to confirm what is theoretically proposed in the article. The Abstract is this: Abstract We show that the vacuum permeability μ 0 and permittivity ε 0 may originate from the magnetization and the polarization of continuously appearing and disappearing fermion pairs. We then show that if we simply model the propagation of the photon in vacuum as a series of transient captures within these ephemeral pairs, we can derive a finite photon velocity. Requiring that this velocity is equal to the speed of light constrains our model of vacuum. Within this approach, the propagation of a photon is a statistical process at scales much larger than the Planck scale. Therefore we expect its time of flight to fluctuate. We propose an experimental test of this prediction. In 2021, the peer-reviewed journal Physics Essays published my paper Calculation of proton charges from the electric charges of the fermions of the quantum vacuum, in which is calculated the value of the electric charge of the fermions of the quantum vacuum (those with an electric charge). The value achieved for the charge e0 is 5.06532 × 10−45 C. From this value of e0, together with the fundamental constants KO , c, ħ , and α = 1/137, the electric charge of the proton is calculated, achieving the value e = 1.6026×10−19 C, which is very close to the experimental e = 1.60218×10−19 C. The article, in PDF, is attached to this email. So, I would like to know yours opinion: would it be feasible to carry out an experiment in the Shanghai Superintense Ultrafast Laser Facility (SULF), to measure the electrical charge e0 = 5.06532 × 10−45 C calculated in my article? Regards Wladimir Guglinski ==============00============== Edited March 6, 2023 by wlad Quote
Vmedvil Posted December 5, 2023 Report Posted December 5, 2023 On 3/5/2023 at 7:41 PM, wlad said: Professor José Abdala Helayel is a researcher of the Centro Brasileiro de Pesquisas Físicas - CBPF (Brazilian Center of Physics Research). I sent him an email yesterday, saying the following (translation to English by Google): ==============00============== Dear Prof Helayel Nobel Laureate in Physics Steven Weinberg expressed his opinion (at a time when physicists were still hopeful that Supersymmetry would be detected in LHC experiments) about the state of quantum theory at that time, in these words: “Perhaps a replacement for today’s quantum theory will come together any time now. Or perhaps not. Maybe it’s just the way we express the theory is bad and the theory itself is right. Or possibly a surprise is in store. There’s always a third possibility, that’s there’s something else entirely, that we’re going to have a revolution in science which is as much of a break with the past as quantum mechanics is a break from classical physics. That’s a possibility. It may be that a paper from a graduate student tomorrow morning will lay it out. By definition I don’t know what that would be.” In the opinion of the Nobel Prize, theoretical physics at that time was already threatened by the need to be reassessed. Many years after these words by Weinberg, in 2014 the Nobel Prize in Physics David Gross expressed his opinion on what represented the failure to confirm Supersymmetry at the LHC, in 2012: “In the absence of any positive experimental evidence for supersymmetry, it’s a good time to scare the hell out of the young people in the audience and tell them: ‘Don’t follow your elders—Go out and look for something new and crazy and powerful and different. Different, especially.’ That’s definitely a good lesson. But I’m too old for that.” Humm... “Something new and crazy and powerful and different. Different, especially”... words that reflected how much the crisis has worsened, after what Steven Weinberg said about the state of quantum physics. Today many must be following the advice of David Gross, looking for a solution through a revolutionary theory that is something new, crazy, powerful, and different. But certainly everyone who is undertaking this quest is making this attempt through the current foundations on which Modern Physics was developed. And among these foundations is the fundamental principle on which Modern Physics was developed: the principle of symmetry. However what if this path is not successful, and the new crazy theories that are proposed require that other crazier theories still be developed? What will be the future of Modern Physics, through this scenario? In 2013, the European Physical Journal C published the article The quantum vacuum as the origin of the speed of light, in which the authors proposed the hypothesis of the existence of pairs of fermions in the quantum vacuum, and proposed an experiment that could prove this hypothesis. In 2021 the peer-reviewed journal Physics Essays published my article Calculation of proton charges from the electric charges of the fermions of the quantum vacuum, in which the electric charge of the fermions of the quantum vacuum is calculated, and from this charge the charge was calculated of the proton, obtaining the value e = 1.6026×10−19 C, which is very close to the experimental e = 1.60218×10−19 C. What I would like to know is whether there is currently technology through which an experiment can be carried out capable of detecting the value of the electric charge of these quantum vacuum fermions, whose value calculated in my article is e0 = 5.06532 × 10−45 C. If this technology is available, and if the experience is confirmed, imagine the repercussions this will have for the future of Modern Physics. For that suggestion of David Gross (that the crisis in physics must be solved through a crazy theory) could be replaced by the suggestion of Steven Weinberg, that "there is always a third possibility". And this third possibility is perhaps contained exactly in what I have been proposing in my work, if the experiments confirm the charge e0 = 5.06532 × 10−45 C of the quantum vacuum fermions (those that have a charge, as there are others that have other properties). It is the future of Modern Physics that is at stake. So, dear Prof. Helayel, I would like to know his opinion. Or, if you are not the most qualified person to answer my question (about whether there is a technology today to measure this charge of quantum vacuum fermions), surely you will know some experimental physicist who has an answer to this question. I am sending as an attachment, in PDF, the article Calculation of proton charges from the electric charges of the fermions of the quantum vacuum. Best Regards Wladimir Guglinski ==============00============== Dr. Helayel sent me the following reply today morning (translation by Google): ==============00============== Hi Wladimir! Thank you for your text with a clear exposition of ideas. About the virtual fermions of the quantum vacuum, perhaps what the most recent and close to what you want is the super-LASER of Shanghai (SULF = Shanghai Ultra LASER Facilities), which operates in the Peta-Watt region and brings very strong electric and magnetic fields. intense. What is expected is that you can "break the vacuum" and generate currents of pairs coming out of the vacuum. Once these measurements currents, it would reach what you are trying to measure. Go to the SO SULF website. Attached here are slides from a seminar that I gave at UFU. See only slide 4, where I leave two references that speak of the SULF. Are not yet what I told you about breaking the vacuum, but they already give details of this super-LASER. See also super-LASER ELI: Extreme Light Infrastructure. Perhaps, with these super-LASERs, what you propose will be achieved measure. Hug, Helayel. ==============00============== Then today I sent an email to SULF, as seen below: ==============00============== Wladimir Guglinski <[email protected]> To:[email protected],[email protected],[email protected] Sun, Mar 5 at 5:44 PM Dear professors Dr. Xiaoyan Liang Dr. Yuxin Leng Dr. Ruxin Li Dr. Zhizhan Xu In March 2013 the European Physical Journal C published the article The quantum vacuum as the origin of the speed of light , in which is proposed an experiment to confirm what is theoretically proposed in the article. The Abstract is this: Abstract We show that the vacuum permeability μ 0 and permittivity ε 0 may originate from the magnetization and the polarization of continuously appearing and disappearing fermion pairs. We then show that if we simply model the propagation of the photon in vacuum as a series of transient captures within these ephemeral pairs, we can derive a finite photon velocity. Requiring that this velocity is equal to the speed of light constrains our model of vacuum. Within this approach, the propagation of a photon is a statistical process at scales much larger than the Planck scale. Therefore we expect its time of flight to fluctuate. We propose an experimental test of this prediction. In 2021, the peer-reviewed journal Physics Essays published my paper Calculation of proton charges from the electric charges of the fermions of the quantum vacuum, in which is calculated the value of the electric charge of the fermions of the quantum vacuum (those with an electric charge). The value achieved for the charge e0 is 5.06532 × 10−45 C. From this value of e0, together with the fundamental constants KO , c, ħ , and α = 1/137, the electric charge of the proton is calculated, achieving the value e = 1.6026×10−19 C, which is very close to the experimental e = 1.60218×10−19 C. The article, in PDF, is attached to this email. So, I would like to know yours opinion: would it be feasible to carry out an experiment in the Shanghai Superintense Ultrafast Laser Facility (SULF), to measure the electrical charge e0 = 5.06532 × 10−45 C calculated in my article? Regards Wladimir Guglinski ==============00============== beautiful insight, it will make a wonderful addition to the scienceforums.com's collections of information. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.