Explaining Yang Mills Theory and Mass Gap and Proton Mass Based on Mathematical Heuristics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hydrodynamic of vortex flows can explain quark gluon plasma fluid flows as an highly idealized liquid which has transition to a hadronic phase to account for nuclear matter components like protons.The mass of quarks are only in a tiny part derived from the Higgs field mechanisms. Strong forces in the atomic nucleus hold together quarks and gluons in the protons as components of nuclear matter. QCD theories are sought to account for the strong fields and hadron mass. There are possible correspondence and analogies with quantum hydrodynamic and its conformal thermodynamics,which might explain the mass gap based on turbulence of vortex flows and its shock wave like energy dissipation leading to a thermodynamics and its momentum or mass derivations. The yang mills theory emerges as an interphase of quantum electrodynamics,vortex hydrodynamics and conformal thermodynamics,so that the nuclear matter and hadronic phase has entropy and information transfers to experience a Higgs like mechanism and phonon modes for self interactions leading to mass and momentum effects. The mathematical models of Hamilton Jacobi equations for positive and negative mass ensembles approximate to a Stochastic NLSE as a Schrodinger expression derivation of Lindblad master equation for heavy quark QCD or QED models. The negative mass like effects can occur in spin orbit coupled high angular momentum idealized fluids at relativistic limits and quantum limits ,explained by GP equations as NLSE approximations for hydrodynamic plasma vortex flows. The hydrodynamics has analogies with QED,and conform to thermodynamics in the entropic limits,and its dissipative turbulence and fluctuations in energy. The Higgs like phonon modes are the result of angular momentum and mass or energy distribution and equilibrium processes described by LG Boltzman equations corresponding to Schrodinger equations in the non linear limits. The self interaction potential can explain mass gap and gluon condensates,and yang mills theory based topological phases with quark hadron transitions and symmetry breaking,that is a combination of the QED,hydrodynamic and thermodynamic energy and mass- momentum transfers,and confining hadronic pressures due to negative mass effects.This paper presents a heuristic model to examine this.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".