Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.4236/jhepgc.2023.91006
J. Klauder
{"title":"A New Proposal for Black Holes","authors":"J. Klauder","doi":"10.4236/jhepgc.2023.91006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4236/jhepgc.2023.91006","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":59175,"journal":{"name":"高能物理(英文)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85237412","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.4236/jhepgc.2023.93049
S. Gullapalli
On the question of wave-particle duality, from the historic Bohr-Einstein debates a century ago, to this day, the view expressed in Niels Bohr’s Complementarity Principle has become well established, confirmed by numerous experiments: If the observation is for wave nature, then the particle changes to wave, and if the observation is for particle nature, then the particle remains particle. However, recently this view has been challenged. With proof based on the definition of wave function, it has been shown that particle always remains particle and its wave function always remains wave, no mysterious change from particle to wave and vice versa.
{"title":"Wave-Particle Duality: Particle Always Remains Particle and Its Wave Function Always Remains Wave","authors":"S. Gullapalli","doi":"10.4236/jhepgc.2023.93049","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4236/jhepgc.2023.93049","url":null,"abstract":"On the question of wave-particle duality, from the historic Bohr-Einstein debates a century ago, to this day, the view expressed in Niels Bohr’s Complementarity Principle has become well established, confirmed by numerous experiments: If the observation is for wave nature, then the particle changes to wave, and if the observation is for particle nature, then the particle remains particle. However, recently this view has been challenged. With proof based on the definition of wave function, it has been shown that particle always remains particle and its wave function always remains wave, no mysterious change from particle to wave and vice versa.","PeriodicalId":59175,"journal":{"name":"高能物理(英文)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81744074","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.4236/jhepgc.2023.92037
A. Beckwith
{"title":"New Conservation Law and a Consideration as to When Forming a Cosmological Constant Term: Using Fifth Force for Frequency of BEC “Gravitons” and Cosmological Constant Formed before BEC Gravitons Form","authors":"A. Beckwith","doi":"10.4236/jhepgc.2023.92037","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4236/jhepgc.2023.92037","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":59175,"journal":{"name":"高能物理(英文)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82848242","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.4236/jhepgc.2023.93054
C. Pilot
: We present a new interpretation of the Higgs field as a composite particle made up of a positive, with, a negative mass Planck particle. According to the Winterberg hypothesis, space, i.e., the vacuum, consists of both positive and negative physical massive particles, which he called planckions, interacting through strong superfluid forces. In our composite model for the Higgs boson, there is an intrinsic length scale associated with the vacuum, different from the one introduced by Winterberg, where, when the vacuum is in a perfectly balanced state, the number density of positive Planck particles equals the number density of negative Planck particles. Due to the mass compensating effect, the vacuum thus appears massless, charge-less, without pressure, energy density, or entropy. However, a situation can arise where there is an effective mass density imbalance due to the two species of Planck particle not matching in terms of populations, within their respective excited energy states. This does not require the physical addition or removal of either positive or negative Planck particles, within a given region of space, as originally thought. Ordinary matter, dark matter, and dark energy can thus be given a new interpretation as residual vacuum energies within the context of a greater vacuum, where the populations of the positive and negative energy states exactly balance. In the present epoch, it is estimated that the dark energy number density imbalance amounts to, (𝑛 + ̅̅̅̅ − 𝑛 − ̅̅̅̅) 𝛬 = 8.52 𝐸 − 3 , per cubic meter, when cosmic distance scales in excess of, 100 𝑀𝑝𝑐 , are considered. Compared to a strictly balanced vacuum, where we estimate that the positive, and the negative Planck number density, is of the order, 7.85 𝐸54 particles per cubic meter, the above is a very small perturbation. This slight imbalance, we argue, would dramatically alleviate, if not altogether eliminate, the long standing cosmological constant problem.
{"title":"A New Interpretation of the Higgs Vacuum Potential Energy Based on a Planckion Composite Model for the Higgs","authors":"C. Pilot","doi":"10.4236/jhepgc.2023.93054","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4236/jhepgc.2023.93054","url":null,"abstract":": We present a new interpretation of the Higgs field as a composite particle made up of a positive, with, a negative mass Planck particle. According to the Winterberg hypothesis, space, i.e., the vacuum, consists of both positive and negative physical massive particles, which he called planckions, interacting through strong superfluid forces. In our composite model for the Higgs boson, there is an intrinsic length scale associated with the vacuum, different from the one introduced by Winterberg, where, when the vacuum is in a perfectly balanced state, the number density of positive Planck particles equals the number density of negative Planck particles. Due to the mass compensating effect, the vacuum thus appears massless, charge-less, without pressure, energy density, or entropy. However, a situation can arise where there is an effective mass density imbalance due to the two species of Planck particle not matching in terms of populations, within their respective excited energy states. This does not require the physical addition or removal of either positive or negative Planck particles, within a given region of space, as originally thought. Ordinary matter, dark matter, and dark energy can thus be given a new interpretation as residual vacuum energies within the context of a greater vacuum, where the populations of the positive and negative energy states exactly balance. In the present epoch, it is estimated that the dark energy number density imbalance amounts to, (𝑛 + ̅̅̅̅ − 𝑛 − ̅̅̅̅) 𝛬 = 8.52 𝐸 − 3 , per cubic meter, when cosmic distance scales in excess of, 100 𝑀𝑝𝑐 , are considered. Compared to a strictly balanced vacuum, where we estimate that the positive, and the negative Planck number density, is of the order, 7.85 𝐸54 particles per cubic meter, the above is a very small perturbation. This slight imbalance, we argue, would dramatically alleviate, if not altogether eliminate, the long standing cosmological constant problem.","PeriodicalId":59175,"journal":{"name":"高能物理(英文)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89975358","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.4236/jhepgc.2023.92028
Ardeshir Irani
{"title":"The Accelerated Expansion of the Universe","authors":"Ardeshir Irani","doi":"10.4236/jhepgc.2023.92028","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4236/jhepgc.2023.92028","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":59175,"journal":{"name":"高能物理(英文)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87392633","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.4236/jhepgc.2023.91005
S. Spremo
{"title":"The Singularity of the Big Bang Can Be Described in Greater Depth than the Limits of the Planck Time and Length","authors":"S. Spremo","doi":"10.4236/jhepgc.2023.91005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4236/jhepgc.2023.91005","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":59175,"journal":{"name":"高能物理(英文)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73553886","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.4236/jhepgc.2023.93050
Vaggelis Talios
The Standard Model is the theory of Physics that describes the elementary particles of matter and the strong, weak and electromagnetic interactions, between them. The theory of the Standard Model does not include the description of the gravitational interactions. It is a very well founded theory that has predicted many experimental results, such as the existence of many particles and has withstood many experimental tests. The key missing piece of the theory to fill in was the Higgs boson , whose existence was reasonably suspected and confirmed by CERN’s ATLAS and CMS experiments in 2012. The current synthesis of the theory was completed in the mid-1970s, after the experimental confirmation of the existence of the quarks, and then confirmed, with the discovery of the Higgs boson, in 2012. All these, are according to the established views of science. But according to the opinions of many scientists, opinions with which I as the author of this paper agree, the theory of the Standard Model is a wrong theory because, while it makes some successful predictions, it does not answer to a number of many other questions that it should answer for its final establishment. Specifically and according to established views, the theory cannot explain the existence of dark matter and dark energy , the behavior of neutrinos and the existence of particles with very different masses . It is also questionable whether the Higgs boson , discovered in the ATLAS experiment is actually the particle that contributes to the creation of the mass of the elementary particles of matter, and whether the Higgs mechanism is theoretically a correct mechanism. There is doubt if the interactions, actually be created by the exchange of bosons? If bosons are really exist? And not any convincing explanation is given by the theory, for the case that, the bosons exist as particles, where were they found? And how do they work?
{"title":"The Standard Model Theory [May Be] a Wrong Theory","authors":"Vaggelis Talios","doi":"10.4236/jhepgc.2023.93050","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4236/jhepgc.2023.93050","url":null,"abstract":"The Standard Model is the theory of Physics that describes the elementary particles of matter and the strong, weak and electromagnetic interactions, between them. The theory of the Standard Model does not include the description of the gravitational interactions. It is a very well founded theory that has predicted many experimental results, such as the existence of many particles and has withstood many experimental tests. The key missing piece of the theory to fill in was the Higgs boson , whose existence was reasonably suspected and confirmed by CERN’s ATLAS and CMS experiments in 2012. The current synthesis of the theory was completed in the mid-1970s, after the experimental confirmation of the existence of the quarks, and then confirmed, with the discovery of the Higgs boson, in 2012. All these, are according to the established views of science. But according to the opinions of many scientists, opinions with which I as the author of this paper agree, the theory of the Standard Model is a wrong theory because, while it makes some successful predictions, it does not answer to a number of many other questions that it should answer for its final establishment. Specifically and according to established views, the theory cannot explain the existence of dark matter and dark energy , the behavior of neutrinos and the existence of particles with very different masses . It is also questionable whether the Higgs boson , discovered in the ATLAS experiment is actually the particle that contributes to the creation of the mass of the elementary particles of matter, and whether the Higgs mechanism is theoretically a correct mechanism. There is doubt if the interactions, actually be created by the exchange of bosons? If bosons are really exist? And not any convincing explanation is given by the theory, for the case that, the bosons exist as particles, where were they found? And how do they work?","PeriodicalId":59175,"journal":{"name":"高能物理(英文)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80835507","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.4236/jhepgc.2023.93051
Vladimir S. Netchitailo
In 1937, P. Dirac proposed the Large Number Hypothesis and the Hypothesis of the variable gravitational “constant,” and later added the notion of continuous creation of Matter in the World. The Hypersphere World-Universe Model (WUM) follows these ideas, albeit introducing a different mechanism of Matter creation. In this paper we show that Gravitational parameter G that can be measured directly makes measurable all Cosmological parameters, which cannot be measured directly.
{"title":"Decisive Role of Gravitational Parameter <i>G</i> in Cosmology","authors":"Vladimir S. Netchitailo","doi":"10.4236/jhepgc.2023.93051","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4236/jhepgc.2023.93051","url":null,"abstract":"In 1937, P. Dirac proposed the Large Number Hypothesis and the Hypothesis of the variable gravitational “constant,” and later added the notion of continuous creation of Matter in the World. The Hypersphere World-Universe Model (WUM) follows these ideas, albeit introducing a different mechanism of Matter creation. In this paper we show that Gravitational parameter G that can be measured directly makes measurable all Cosmological parameters, which cannot be measured directly.","PeriodicalId":59175,"journal":{"name":"高能物理(英文)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82588066","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.4236/jhepgc.2023.93063
J. Perron
{"title":"ETG Galaxies (<400 [My]) from JWST Already Predicted in 2019 from This Cosmological Model AΛΩ (Slow Bang Model, SB)","authors":"J. Perron","doi":"10.4236/jhepgc.2023.93063","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4236/jhepgc.2023.93063","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":59175,"journal":{"name":"高能物理(英文)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80811433","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：