Sylwester's 'Everlasting theory'

Below is the link to my new paper (3 pages)

http://vixra.org/abs/1507.0034

The Hot Subdwarfs in Omega Centauri Cluster as Untypical Supernovae

Abstract
Using the Scale-Symmetric Theory (SST), we argue for the tower of the Chandrasekhar limits as the origin of the helium-rich hot subdwarfs in omega Centauri cluster.

The structure of bare muons described within SST leads to the hot blue stars with a mass of 0.465 solar masses.

Previously we showed that stars with masses of 1.395, 11.20 and 0.891 solar masses should behave as the Type Ia supernovae i.e. after the explosion of such stars there should not be created a neutron star as a remnant. Stars with a mass of 0.465 solar masses are the untypical supernovae. They are the remnants of the exploding stars with a mass of 0.891 solar masses which lose their outer hydrogen layers. Their mass is too small to cause a collapse and next explosion as it is for higher Chandrasekhar limits. But the 3-component weak mass (a ball composed of the confined Einstein-spacetime components that is entangled with two rotating neutrinos) in muons (for mass equal to 0.465 solar masses there appears a maximum for number density of such 3-component systems and each component carries energy equal to 17.61 MeV) is a catalyst for fusions of three alpha particles into carbon-12 (the last experimental data show that any nonzero amount of coherence in a system can be converted into an equal amount of entanglement between that system and another initially incoherent one). Due to such fusions, surfaces of the untypical supernovae are very hot (a narrow temperature range from 35,000 K to 40,000 K). They are the extreme horizontal branch (EHB) stars.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Below is the link to my new paper (5 pages)

http://vixra.org/abs/1507.0087

A Revised Scenario for the Evolution of Galaxies


Recent observations suggest that the models of synchronized co-evolution of supermassive black holes (SMBHs) and their host galaxies in the early Universe are partially incorrect - Trakhtenbrot et al. (10 July 2015). They found in the galaxy CID-947, which is placed in time distance about 12 Gyr (z = 3.328), a black hole with a mass of about 10 % of the total galactic mass. On the other hand, the SMBH in such a normal-size galaxy achieves up to about 0.2 to 0.5 % of the host galaxy mass in the present day i.e. their mass is about 20 to 50 times smaller (!). This observational fact is consistent with the cosmology described within the Scale-Symmetric Theory (SST).



Summary
Here we present a revised scenario for the evolution of galaxies.

The theory of the cosmological scale described within the Scale-Symmetric Theory shows that the protogalaxies composed of the neutron black holes, which were grouped in larger structures, were the initial states in evolution of galaxies. Due to the inflows of the dark matter, the protogalaxies had transformed into the typical quasars. The initial ratio of mass of the central black hole to total mass of typical quasar was about F = 0.583. Next, the turbulent inflows of the dark energy differentiated evolution of single and merged quasars.

The correct age of the Universe since the beginning of its expansion is 21.61 Gyr (the Ludwig et al. data (2009) suggest that the Universe is about 22 Gyr old) but due to the duality of relativity and the existence of the cosmological scale with the diameter of about 1 Gyr, we cannot see the initial period of about 7.75 Gyr of evolution of the galaxies, i.e. the time distance to the most distant galaxies is 13.86 Gyr as it is in the mainstream cosmology (about 13.8 Gyr). But we can see the CMB and the final stage of evolution of the quasars (about 2 Gyr from the 10 Gyr). Moreover, due to the turbulent inflows of the dark energy during the unseen period of evolution of galaxies, the structures of the most distant quasars and galaxies are differentiated. During the unseen period 7.75 Gyr of evolution of galaxies, the number density of merging galaxies was highest and number density of explosions of quasars which had led to creation of the dwarf galaxies was highest as well.

Due to the turbulent inflows of dark energy during the unseen period of evolution of galaxies, more and more NBHs transformed into dust i.e. with time, due to the inflows of dark energy, the initial ratio F = 0.583 characteristic for typical quasars had decreased so the value F = 0.1 for CID-947 is permissible. But more plentiful inflows of the dark energy during the unseen period of evolution of the Universe caused that in the most distant Universe (i.e. at the beginning of the visible period of evolution) there as well should be galaxies with lower value of F. Just there should be quasars/galaxies with F defined by following interval <0, 0.583>.

Due to the inflows of the dark energy, there appeared accretion disc around the central black holes. Just during this period, the evolution of black holes was reversed.

It is assumed that in the very distant Universe, with increasing distance, number of faint galaxies should grow exponentially but the Scale-Symmetric theory shows that this assumption is incorrect. The largest increase in the number of the dwarf galaxies was during the unseen period 7.75 Gyr due to the down --> up evolution of massive galaxies (i.e. the exploding massive protogalaxies/quasars and their expansion due to the inflows of the dark energy and due to the expansion of the Universe) so with time, in the visible period of evolution of the Universe the number of galaxies practically should not change.

The structures of the dark matter consist of the concentric circles composed of the luminal Einstein-spacetime components i.e. of the entangled neutrino-antineutrino pairs. They were produced in the very dense baryonic matter when the dark matter had flowed into the rotating protogalaxies. Next, due to the weak interactions of the stars with the very stable structures of dark matter, there appeared the characteristic rotation/velocity curves of disc galaxies which solve the galaxy rotation problem i.e. the discrepancy between observed galaxy rotation curves and the theoretical predictions which follow from the distribution of the visible matter and theory of gravitation.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Below is the link to my new paper (14 pages)

http://vixra.org/abs/1508.0215

The Revised Theory of Black Holes and Accretion Discs

Abstract
Escaping information from black holes (BHs) produce firewalls at the event horizon. Such walls of fire absorb anything falling in black holes so they destroy them. It leads to conclusion that black hole understood as singularity with event horizon cannot be realized by Nature and that General Relativity (GR) and Quantum Physics (QP) are the incomplete theories. To solve the information paradox, Hawking proposes to replace the event horizon for apparent horizon i.e. for horizon widened due to quantum fluctuations in such a way that light can escape but there is lack of a mathematical description.

Here, within the Scale-Symmetric Theory (SST), we solved the information paradox in a different. The key to solve the many unsolved problems concerning black holes are the interactions of nuclear matter with the luminal Einstein spacetime both composed of the neutrino-antineutrino pairs, which dominate, and neutrinos (detection of the pairs is much difficult than neutrinos) - there appear the ordered virtual motions in spacetime, dark-matter structures and advection.

Incompleteness of GR and QP causes that altogether with good solutions we obtain solutions that cannot be realized by Nature and singularities are such solutions. SST shows that there are objects with circular orbit for photons and abstract event horizon but without singularity - we will call such objects the modified black holes (MBHs).

The RHIC experiment showed that inside baryons are dense gluon fields. On the other hand, the SST shows that intensity of the superluminal quantum entanglement (it follows from the extended GR) close to the Planck scale is tremendous so the cores of baryons are indestructible. It leads to conclusion that MBHs are built of modified neutron black holes (MNBHs) which are the biggest neutron stars.

When we take into account also the gravitational interactions then matter winds around the center point of MBH at a continuously decreasing distance from the point, next spirals on surfaces of the MNBHs towards their poles, and next twists along the relativistic jet.

Here we solved as well following problems: why maximum efficiency of accretion process is 42.41%, why accretion disc cannot transform into a torus, what determines radii of the accretion discs, why the continuum spectrum is partially non-thermal, what is density and what are radial and angular velocities of matter, what is pressure, why the luminal Einstein spacetime does not collapse to separated black holes, what is the mechanism of production of the dark-matter structures, how such structures interact with matter, what is distribution of MNBHs in a MBH, and so on.

The obtained results are consistent with observational data.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

According to the Scale-Symmetric Theory (it is the Everlasting Theory) the dark matter structures composed of the entangled neutrino-antineutrino pairs are the virtual cosmological strings. The ordered motions of the pairs along the cosmological strings decrease local dynamic pressure in the luminal Einstein spacetime which consists of the neutrino-antineutrino pairs as well but they are not entangled (they interact gravitationally only). It forces the inflows of additional pairs near by the cosmological strings - it increases local mass density of the luminal Einstein spacetime - it is the dark matter.

From the B mesons decays follows that there is difference in the predicted within the Standard Model rates of decay of tau and muon. These LHC experimental data show that the Standard Model is the incomplete theory.

 

Below is the link to my new paper (4 pages)

http://vixra.org/abs/1509.0002

Cross-Sections for Scattering of Neutrinos on Nucleons and Electrons

Abstract
Here, within the Scale-Symmetric Theory (SST), we calculated for an isoscalar target and electrons the total neutrino and antineutrino charged-current (CC) cross-sections divided by neutrino energy as a function of neutrino energy. Obtained results are very close to experimental data.

 

Below is the link to my new paper (4 pages)

http://vixra.org/abs/1509.0078

The Masses and Origin of the 3 : 2 Twin-Peak QPOs Frequency Ratio in the Microquasars

Abstract
High frequency quasi-periodic oscillations (HF QPOs) are characteristic for the X-ray power-density spectra of a few microquasars and low mass X-ray binaries. Sometimes there appear the twin peak QPOs and then the frequency ratio for the peaks is close or equal to 3/2. Mostly the QPOs models assume oscillations of toroidal structures near black holes or neutron stars. At present, there is no consensus on the origin of QPOs.

Here we present the model of the twin-peak QPOs as a result of oscillations defined by torus and a ring inside it. We use the Scale-Symmetric Theory (SST), especially the revised theory of black holes and accretion discs. Within presented here model we calculated the masses of the twin peak QPO microquasars. Obtained theoretical results are consistent with observational data.

But accuracy of the observational data is very low whereas of the theoretical results is very high so future more precise observational data can be used to verify presented here model.

We showed some analogy between the phenomena inside the core of baryons and the phenomena leading to the twin peak QPOs i.e. we showed some analogy between particle physics and cosmology.

 

Below is the link to my new paper (3 pages)

http://vixra.org/abs/1509.0084

The Inelastic Cross Section versus the Centre-of-Mass Energy for Proton-Proton Collisions

Abstract
Here, applying the Scale-Symmetric Theory (SST), we calculated the inelastic cross section versus the centre-of-mass energy for proton-proton collisions.

For centre-of-mass energies lower than 34.2 TeV, the obtained theoretical results overlap with the Standard-Model predictions but for energies of proton higher than 17.1 TeV, contrary to the Standard-Model prediction, there appears the asymptote: cross-section = 82.4 mb = constant. It follows from the fact that due to the production of the 17.1 TeV Higgs-boson-like particles, the protons cannot be accelerated above energy 17.1 TeV. Just whole surplus proton energy is instantaneously emitted. It is associated with the internal structure of the core of baryons.

Emphasize that calculated here the cross section for energy 13 TeV (73.1 mb) is the central value obtained in the ATLAS experiment.

 

Just an off-the-cuff question, but are these papers supporting supersymmetry (SUSY), or derived from a position that susy is correct?

 

A few ideas that appear in SUSY are realized by Nature but generally SUSY is a science fiction. The same concerns the string/M theory.

The hierarchy problem is not solved via superpartners (no one was discovered) as it is in SUSY but via the succeeding phase transitions of the modified, non-gravitating Higgs field. There appear the scales so the Planck scale, which concerns the neutrinos and neutrino-antineutrino pairs, is separated from the other Standard-Model masses/energies.

The Scale-Symmetric Theory (SST) shows that there are in existence closed and open strings/loops (as it is in string theory) in 4 different scales but it is not true that there are different vibrations of the fundamental string (in string theory, such vibrations lead to different physical quantities, for example, to the spin-2 gravitons). SST shows that bare particles are built of interacting fundamental strings but they all have the same internal properties. Binary systems of them are responsible for quantum entanglement.

We know that the string theory leads to the fermion-boson symmetry (the supersymmetry). The SST shows that Nature indeed realizes a substitute of such supersymmetry, for example, the neutral pion (boson) is the superpartner of the core of baryons (it is the spin-1/2 object i.e. it is a fermion) but the origin of such supersymmetry is very different.

And so on….

 

Just as I suspected, based on what little I seem to absorb from my layman level enthusiasm.

This material will quickly get beyond me, but are the succeeding phase transitions brought about experimentally from high energy collisions, and do they occur as the energy density naturally declines throughout the decay sequences?

That statement, and the rest of your post that follows would be too demanding for me to try to catch up with. I wanted to put what you have been posting into a little bit of a perspecitive relative to SUSY.

Thanks for taking the time to put that together for me.

 

All the nonsensical ideas that appear in the mainstream theories follow from the fact that particle-physics physicists and cosmologists do not understand the behaviour of neutrinos and do not understand that the formula for energy of photons and gluons,
energy = Planck constant * frequency (E = h f),
is only one part of two-element problem.

At first consider the neutrinos.
The Standard-Model (SM) neutrinos are the massless objects but physicists suggest that they have very small mass (my theory, i.e. the Scale-Symmetric Theory (SST), shows that neutrinos have very small mass). It suggests that the SM is the incomplete theory.

Assume that the neutrinos have mass. The experimental data suggest that they are the luminal particles so according to the General Relativity (GR) their relativistic mass should be infinite but we know that it is untrue. So we can assume that neutrinos are moving with speed very close to the speed of light in “vacuum”, c, but then it leads to conclusion that we can stop the neutrinos. No one saw low-speed neutrinos. My intuition prompts that for some reason neutrinos and neutrino-antineutrino pairs have mass and that simultaneously, generally, their speed is equal to the c. Why it is possible? It is possible because the leading theories, i.e. GR and SM, are the incomplete theories and my SST leads to the lacking part of these two theories.

Just the neutrinos and their pairs are the non-relativistic particles i.e. they are the luminal particles but their mass does not depend on their velocities and it is the reason that their mass is not infinite.

Why neutrinos, which are the principle-of-equivalence particles (i.e. their inertial mass is equal to their gravitational mass), are the non-relativistic particles? It follows from the internal structure of spacetime and the different interactions of neutrinos and the other principle-of-equivalence particles (the other SM particles) with the spacetime.

The SST shows that the other SM particles acquire their relativistic mass not due to a direct transformation of pure energy (for example, rotational energy) into inertial/gravitational mass. Just due to the law of conservation of spin, accelerated the other SM particles decrease local pressure so there are the inflows of additional luminal Einstein-spacetime components (they are the non-relativistic neutrino-antineutrino pairs) into the accelerated particles. It causes that mass density of accelerated the other SM particles increases - such is the origin of the relativistic mass.

On the other hand, the neutrinos are built of the binary systems of closed strings (they are responsible for the quantum entanglement) but spacetime does not contain free binary systems of closed strings so they cannot inflow into neutrinos so their mass cannot increase i.e. they indeed are the non-relativistic objects.


Now consider the photons and gluons.
The formula E = h f suggests that motions of pure vibrations are possible. But my intuition prompts that it is the most nonsensical assumption. In reality, motions of pure energy are possible only when such energy is carried by inertial mass or by principle-of-equivalence particles. Photons and gluons are the rotational energies of the luminal Einstein spacetime i.e. are the rotational energies of the non-relativistic neutrino-antineutrino pairs.

In reality, the different properties of the photons and gluons do not follow from different properties of their carriers (they are the same) but from different interactions with, respectively, electromagnetic fields and nuclear strong fields (their properties are different). It causes that there is one type of photons and 8 types of gluons.

Recapitulation
To solve correctly the hierarchy problem (which is incorrectly solved within SUSY) we must understand internal structure of the carriers of photons and gluons, i.e. of the neutrino-antineutrino pairs, and we must understand the internal structure of spacetime. The SST follows from the extended GR and due to the succeeding phase transitions leads to the internal structures of neutrinos and spacetime. There appear the scales that correctly solve the hierarchy problem and all basic problems unsolved within GR and SM.

 

Yes, I know of no reason neutrinos wouldn't have a tiny mass, in fact, I think they must; but that is a layman opinion. Is there any leeway in the SM to accept that neutrinos have a tiny mass, or is it a deal breaker for the Standard Model?
Further, when you say the SST shows that neutrinos have mass, by "shows", do you mean observational evidence or mathematical "proof"?

Ok, when you refer to them as luminal particles, do you mean that they have characteristics of light, i.e. of photons?

Granted, GR and SM are incomplete in that they don't answer all of the questions out there. Obviously SM is still finding particles and has not found some predicted particles, so it is being evolved. Now you say SST completes them; that would be good

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

.

I can sort that out to some degree based on the fact that you cannot accelerate a mass to the speed of light because it would take infinite energy.

So your model is Lorentz invariant? Spacetime has some internal structure? At this point I am not up to speed, of course, but what is the internal structure of spacetime? BTW, you can just continue with your explanations and disregard my ignorance, which is recommended, lol.

Conceptually I would be able to find some degree of agreement, even though I may not have the same understanding of the nature or particles and space.

Yikes, lol. I generally think in terms of waves carrying energy, and as particles are accelerated they pick up mass by being forced to contain more wave energy inflowing from the direction of motion, but this is an example of why you should disregard my comments and go on with your explanations.

So considering photons and gluons, they might not be vibrating, at least not until they are incorporated in inertial mass.

I am always enthusiastic about learning and understanding; so I have some work to do

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

.

Understanding the internal structure of neutron pairs, and of spacetime, and then how they violate SUSY at the same time ... it must be somewhat exciting.

 

Your last post needs long-drawn-out explanations so here I will fix my attention on internal structure of spacetime.

Why leading mainstream theories are such messy? It follows from the fact that there are in the majority scientists assuming that when they have good equations, such as, for example, Einstein’s field equations (GR) or quantum-theory-of-fields (QTFs) equations, then each solution can be realized by Nature. It is obvious untrue. They do not understand that GR and QTFs are the incomplete theories so together with good solutions (they appear when the incompleteness can be neglected) there appear as well big number of wrong interpretations and solutions that Nature cannot realize (for example, the gravitational low-mass mini black holes). They do not understand that in physics, contrary to mathematics, most important is physical “picture”, not mathematical equations and transformations. Mathematics in physics is very important but only if we know correct physical “pictures”. GR and QTFs are incomplete so only sporadically physical “pictures” are correct and only then applied mathematics is realized by Nature.

What we should do to be able to select the good solutions from the wrong ones? What we should do to find the lacking part of Theory of Everything (ToE)? Just we should find the truly fundamental initial conditions and it is done within the Scale-Symmetric Theory (SST).

It is assumed that on the lowest level of Nature (the smallest scale) it behaves in a quantum way. It is the most nonsensical assumption. Particles can behave in a quantum way when there is a bare particle surrounded by a field produced by the bare particle. To do this, the bare particle must have non-trivial internal structure. Bare particle cannot be a mathematical point (so sizeless) as it is in the Standard Model (SM). The same concerns the sizeless singularities in GR. Existence of sizeless physical objects in physics follows from incompetence. Just quantum particles cannot be the smallest objects.

The smallest objects must be internally structureless so they cannot produce any field. It leads to conclusion that only some extension of a classical theory, i.e. some extension of GR, can lead to truly fundamental initial conditions. Just quantum physics can appear only on higher levels of Nature.

Emphasize once more that on lowest scale, Nature must behave classically and appearing objects cannot produce fields i.e. they are bare i.e. they do not produce gravitational field i.e. they are the non-gravitating objects i.e. they have only inertial mass and they can interact only due to direct collisions (there appears the dynamic viscosity). When such pieces of space are free then they have broken contact with bare particles producing fields. We can call the “field” composed of free pieces of space the imaginary field but it is physical field with positive inertial mass density. Just the word “imaginary” means “broken contact with bare particles producing fields”, means “not interacting by fields”, means “non-gravitating”, and so on.

So we must use the GR and it is done within the SST. There is the formula for total energy of subluminal particles

E = mcc / sqrt(1 – vv/(cc)).

When we multiply the mass, m, and speeds, v and c, by i = sqrt(-1) (the imaginary unit) then we obtain

E = mcc / sqrt(vv/(cc) – 1).

It leads to conclusion that the pieces of space are superluminal (tachyons). Physicists formulated theory of tachyons applying GR. But such theory is nonsensical. Physicists do not understand that we cannot apply a mixture of the last formula (it describes totally new physical “picture”) and the not extended GR. Such mixture leads astray.

Just the last formula says that one part of spacetime is the non-gravitating superluminal Higgs field that I call the modified Higgs field.

The modified Higgs field, during the SST inflation, due to the direct dynamic viscosity, partially transformed into the ground state of the luminal (speed is equal to the c) Einstein spacetime composed of the neutrino-antineutrino pairs and neutrinos. In ground state, the Einstein-spacetime components interact only gravitationally but in excited states they can interact due to the confinement and/or quantum entanglement.

The modified Higgs field interacts with neutrinos - it causes that they are the stable particles and causes that the neutrinos acquire their gravitational mass. In reality, the Higgs boson with a mass of 125 GeV is the composite Higgs boson composed of the neutrino-antineutrino pairs.

Recapitulation
In reality, the spacetime consists of the superluminal Higgs field (it is directly associated with gravitational fields) and of the luminal Einstein spacetime (it is directly associated with the quantum fields). Properties of the two parts are very different so we cannot unify gravity and Standard Model within the same methods.

 

In my last post I answered your first very important question: “Spacetime has some internal structure?”

Here I will try to answer your second very important question:

I will try to show that the ground state of the luminal Einstein spacetime in relation to masses is not Lorentz invariant whereas the part of the Einstein spacetime entangled with their sources (i.e. the dark matter) is Lorentz invariant and General Relativity concerns such entangled fields. Emphasize as well that all fields (virtual as well) entangled with a source are Lorentz invariant.

In the ground state of the luminal Einstein spacetime (in this state the neutrino-antineutrino pairs interact only gravitationally (!) and do not rotate), all the neutrino-antineutrino pairs are moving with the luminal speed in relation to the superluminal Higgs field and such motions, far away from the modified gravitational black holes (according to the Scale-Symmetric Theory (SST), there are not in existence the singularities which appear in General Relativity (GR) due to its incompleteness), are not correlated with motions of masses. It leads to conclusion that the ground state of the Einstein spacetime far away from the modified gravitational black holes is NOT Lorentz invariant.

But it is obvious that sometimes the GR gives good solutions. Why? Due to the SST, the answer is very simple.

There is the short and long distance quantum entanglement. The neutrinos, so the neutrino-antineutrino pairs as well, consist of the superluminal binary closed strings (entanglons) responsible for the quantum entanglement. Due to the succeeding phase transitions of the superluminal Higgs field during the SST inflation, the SST tachyonic field partially transformed into the superluminal entanglons and next the entanglons transformed into the luminal neutrino-antineutrino pairs i.e. into the luminal Einstein spacetime. The entangled neutrino-antineutrino pairs exchange the superluminal entanglons and such entanglement is much stronger than the gravitational interactions of the neutrino-antineutrino pairs in the ground state of the luminal Einstein spacetime.

All principle-of-equivalence particles (i.e. particles with inertial mass is equal to gravitational mass) greater than the non-rotating-spin neutrino-antineutrino pairs (effective size of such pairs and neutrinos depends on their rotational energy so their cross-section increases with energy) are built from the luminal neutrino-antineutrino pairs and sometimes from single neutrinos. It is due to the confinement and/or quantum entanglement which are much stronger than the gravitational interactions. It causes that when we accelerate such particle composed of the neutrino-antineutrino pairs (and sometime of neutrinos) then the partially ordered motions of the pairs decrease local pressure in the luminal Einstein spacetime so there are inflows of additional Einstein-spacetime components so mass density of the particle increases i.e. increases its relativistic mass. We can see that the principle-of-equivalence particles can emit the rotating-spin neutrino-antineutrino pairs i.e. photons and gluons. In my last post I wrote that in the nuclear strong fields, the rotating neutrino-antineutrino pairs behave as gluons whereas in gravitational and electromagnetic fields they behave as photons. The photons and gluons are entangled with their source or with a last-interaction object and sometimes it is a detector as, for example, the Michelson-Morley interferometer.

Emphasize that the speed c of photons and gluons is in relation to a source with which the photons and gluons are entangled (!).

Now the most important sentence: The Lorentz invariance concerns the entangled photons and gluons, not the interacting only gravitationally the neutrino-antineutrino pairs in the ground state of the luminal Einstein spacetime. It causes that sometimes the GR leads to solutions that can be realized by Nature. The Lorentz invariance concerns as well the fields entangled with sources that are built of the non-rotating-spin neutrino-antineutrino pairs - it is the DARK MATTER.
BTW: The DARK ENERGY consists of the additional Einstein-spacetime components in their ground state i.e. they are not entangled (they interact gravitationally only) and they do not rotate.
We can see that dark matter and dark energy both consist of the neutrino-antineutrino pairs but they are in different states.

So once more: The GR concerns the photon fields entangled with their sources. The same concerns the relativistic masses. A relativistic mass is entangled with the field that accelerates it.

For example, within the GR and SST, applying very different methods, we can calculate the total perihelion motion of Mercury (only within SST we obtain correct value for the TOTAL perihelion motion of Venus - see my book). Why? It is due to the fact that in GR is obligatory the Lorentz invariance whereas in SST are the entangled fields that as well are Lorentz invariant.

Some examples
1.
The gravitational fields are the gradients in the superluminal non-gravitating Higgs field whereas the Standard-Model fields follow from specific polarizations of the luminal Einstein spacetime. Density of the luminal Einstein spacetime is about 4*10^42 times higher than the gravitational fields. It is the reason that gravity is so weak.
2.
Due to the ground state of the luminal Einstein spacetime (its density is about 10^55 times greater than baryonic matter) the Universe as a whole is flat.
3.
The photons emitted by distant galaxies are not Lorentz invariant in relation to Milky Way so the relativistic formula for redshift derived within the GR cannot be realized by Nature. It leads to the illusion of acceleration of the expansion of the Universe.
4.
The superluminal entanglons inside the luminal-Einstein-spacetime components cause that energy (E = mvv), not mass (!), frozen inside the ground state of the Einstein spacetime is tremendous i.e. this superluminal energy is about 119 powers of ten greater than its gravitational mass. It is the lacking energy that follows from the quantum physics but no one knows where it is.

 

Thanks for those replies; I'm reading with some hope of better understanding your model.

 

Below is the link to my new paper (6 pages)

http://vixra.org/abs/1509.0237

The Origin of the Space Roar

Abstract
The space roar is the unsolved problem in cosmology and particle physics. Here, applying the Scale-Symmetric Theory, we showed that the ARCADE 2 and other literature the space roar for frequencies from 22 MHz to 10 GHz follows from the motion of the very early Universe in relation to the ground state of the luminal Einstein spacetime, follows also from the expansion of the Universe, and from the decays of the quadrupoles of charged pions and of the bottom quark-antiquark pairs into photons.

Derived here the excess power-law spectrum in addition to a CMB temperature of 2.725 +- 0.001 K is consistent with observational data.

Here as well we calculated the precise mass of the bottom quark: 4167.58 MeV.

 

Below is the link to my new paper (3 pages)

http://vixra.org/abs/1510.0015

The Effective Range Parameters for Nucleon-Nucleon Scattering at Low Energies

Abstract
We know that the Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD) fails at low energies. For example, within QCD, we cannot calculate precise mass and spin of nucleons. It does not concern the Scale-Symmetric Theory (SST). Moreover, experimental data show that at low energies the effective range parameters for nn, np, and pp scatterings are similar, but different. Why?

Here, applying SST, we calculated the effective range parameters for nn (2.732 fm), for np (2.778 fm), and pp (2.824 fm). These theoretical results are consistent with experimental data. At low energies, the effective range parameters follow from exchanges of virtual pions (which are responsible for the nuclear strong interactions) and production of the virtual condensates (which are responsible for the nuclear weak interactions at low energies). The condensates insignificantly increase the effective ranges. Just at low energies, the effective range parameters for nucleons follow from their strong-weak interactions described within SST.

The obtained here and within SST results show that QCD is the incomplete and partially incorrect theory - the same concerns the electroweak theory at low energies.

 

Here

http://news.discovery.com/space/our-universe-its-the-simplest-thing-we-know-151007.htm

Neil Turok, Director of the Perimeter Institute of Theoretical Physics in Ontario, Canada, is saying as follows:

“…the Universe, on its largest and smallest scales, is telling us that it is actually amazingly simple (contrary to the very complicated theories). But to fully grasp what this means, we’ll need a revolution in physics.”

I claim that the Scale-Symmetric Theory (SST) will be the revolution in physics i.e. the succeeding phase transitions of the inflation field (the Higgs field) will revolutionize physics. But SST shows that the statement that the Universe is “scale-free” is correct partially only.

The SST shows that there are the five scales. The first scale concerns the superluminal inflation field whereas the second concerns the superluminal entanglons responsible for the quantum entanglement. On the other hand, SST shows that the three other scales are dual i.e. theories of them are similar so we can say that they are “scale-free”. These three dual scales concern the luminal Einstein spacetime composed of the neutrino-antineutrino pairs, the Standard-Model scale, and the cosmological scale.


Now a few sentences concerning the “oscillations” of neutrinos
There are three possibilities:
1.
Neutrinos transform one to others i.e. their internal structure can change. Using simpler words, we can say that I can transform into, for example, Angelina Jolie. All know that it is impossible.
2.
The “free neutrinos” (then, they interact gravitationally only) collide with neutrinos in the neutrino-antineutrino pairs the luminal Einstein spacetime consists of. It means that instead the suggested neutrino oscillations there, in reality, are the exchanges of neutrinos. Using simpler words, we can say that a person (it is some analog to a free neutrino) can kick out one of two-body board of directors i.e., for example, the President or Vice-President (the two-body board is an analog to a neutrino-antineutrino pair). We know that such processes are common.
3.
Assume that there are two types/species of neutrinos (the electron- and muon-neutrinos) and that there is the third tau-neutrino composed of three different electron-muon neutrinos (the SST shows that it is true). The tau-neutrinos can decay into electron- or muon-neutrino (or to their antineutrinos) and a carrier of gluons and photons i.e. into a neutrino-antineutrino pair. It as well looks as a neutrino oscillation but we can see that it is an illusion. Using simpler words, we can say that one person (it is an analog to electron- or muon neutrino) in a three-body clique (it is an analog to tau-neutrino) deserts the group. We know that probability of such decay is very high.

Emphasize as well (I wrote it many times) that free neutrino-antineutrino pair interacts only gravitationally so it is very difficult to detect the ground state of the luminal Einstein spacetime.

So what did you chose: the unreal transformations/oscillations of neutrinos (Nobel Prize) or the common exchanges and decays which imitate the neutrino oscillations (the Scale-Symmetric Theory)?

 

Below is the link to my new paper (4 pages)

http://vixra.org/abs/1510.0341

What is wrong with the Glueballs, Oscillations of Neutrinos, and Quantization?

Abstract
Here, on the basis of the Scale-Symmetric Theory (SST), we present the next incorrect mainstream views. The very short remarks and justifications concern the glueballs, oscillations of neutrinos, and quantization.

We answered following questions.

Is it true that glueballs, i.e. the condensates of gluons, are created purely from nuclear strong force?

It is suggested that neutrinos can spontaneously change their internal structure. Are the observed oscillations of neutrinos the forbidden transformations as it is in the mainstream theory or they are the allowed exchanges and decays of neutrinos that result from correctly described within SST the internal structure of spacetime?

Why the methods of quantization of classical mechanics applied in the Standard Model do not lead to precise mass, spin, and muon radius of nucleons or to masses of quarks?

 

Below is the link to my new paper (6 pages)

http://vixra.org/abs/1510.0508

Mental Computers and the Origin of DNA

Abstract
Here, on the basis of the Scale-Symmetric Theory (SST), we showed how are unified the particle physics and mental world within the Einstein spacetime which is composed of the luminal neutrino-antineutrino pairs and neutrinos. The neutrino-antineutrino pairs in the Einstein spacetime can interact gravitationally only (it concerns the ground state of the Einstein spacetime and the dark energy) or can be entangled (they are the dark-matter structures; the mental solitons are the dark-matter structures as well). The dark matter structures can be entangled with ordinary matter. Due to the internal structure of neutrinos, the neutrino-antineutrino pairs cannot annihilate.

On such basis, we present the difference between the simulating computers and mental computers. Mental computers need senses and must produce mental solitons via their nervous system, not via algorithms which are used in the simulating computers but, of course, we can use algorithms additionally (the hybrid computers). Creativeness is even not probabilistic so it cannot be simulated via algorithms i.e. cannot be controlled.

Here as well we showed that linear structures composed of entangled neutrinos are the precursors of DNAs.