Anatomy of spacetime and possible origins of internal symmetry and all particle quantum numbers
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Not driven by observations, this paper digs into the “internal workings” of spacetime. Through logical deductions, micro dimensions appear to be uncovered, with possible SU(4) or SU(5): 1. It is thought that special relativity merely initiated the definition of spacetime, but more scales are yet to be defined. 2. In the definition of spacetime, EM (electromagnetism) played another critical role, i.e., the six circular magnetic and electric field lines (running on the six planes) cross and “define equivalencies” between the four linear scales. Without this definition, light would not be measured at the same speed in different directions. Being a gauge theory, EM defines two things: Linear scales and “equivalencies” between linear scales. 3. For any scale (and their equivalencies), there could be no or many arbitrarily assumed definitions, or a concrete definition based on relevant physics. Nature would conform with but the one based on relevant physics, because Nature itself is consisted of that relevant physics. Thus, the principle: No scale and their equivalencies are meaningful unless defined by relevant physics. 4. Then, what are those fields running (and defining equivalencies between the six “angle scales”) on the six planes of the 4D spacetime? It is believed to be the “classical” weak fields which run in solid angles (or “3D angles”) between the six planes. (The only suspicion is that this rotation does not preserve vector length, which is not a problem ultimately.) 5. If the six angle scales are drawn as six axes of a 6D superspace, then the “3D angle” rotations look like “plane angle” rotations and cause SO(6)∼SU(4) [or SO(10)∼SU(5) for 5D spacetime], which appears to match baryon spectrum without quarks. 6. Since this rotation is between “planes” of the “external” spacetime, no linear dimension is visible, yet causing P-violations. 7. Similarly, fields running in 4D and 5D angle rotations (between 3D and 4D surfaces) must also exist, which may be responsible for CP-violation and strong interactions. 8. The 5D angle rotations may be generating Baryon and Lepton numbers and hence explaining their conservation behaviors, e.g., no proton decay. 9. It can be inferred, if 3D, 4D (and 5D) angle rotation fields did not exist, the 4D (and 5D) spacetime would be warped and the four (or five) linear axes would not be perpendicular to each other. 10. EM was simplified and turned elegant “only” after redefinition of spacetime by special relativity. Likewise, weak, CP-violation and strong interactions are expected to simplify and turn as elegant as EM when 2D (plane), 3D, and 4D angle scales are defined by weak, CP-violation, and strong forces, respectively. 11. Verifications as accurate as EM are expected too. 12. Mathematically, higher angle rotations thought to be inexistent only because it does not conserve vector length. Actually, they did not vanish and their symmetries would surface in particle classifications when linear momentum is not concerned. Micro dimensions being invisible is because symmetries do not have to happen between linear axes, but can happen between 2-, 3- or 4-surfaces. These geometries together generate the complete particles spectrum.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».