The First Formula to Compute the Mass of All Particles
by John SkieSwanne
There are many yet unanswered questions in Particle Physics. For one:
Is there a theory that can explain the masses of particular quarks and leptons in particular generations from first principles?
source: unsolved problems in physics
I've spent years pondering upon this mass problem. The thing is, if you take a look at the standard model, especially on the mass part, you'll
notice something very important: the masses of two given particles do not seem to follow a pattern relative to each other's. Which is... strongly
inconvenient, to put it midly, for all of us who dream about a ToE (Theory of Everything).
Not only do these particles's mass follow different orders of magnitude (the electron is set at 0.511 MeV, while the top quark soars at 171.2
), but as you go from one generation to the next, the order of "which particle is lighter than the other" itself changes. Since the
beginning of particle physics, no pattern was ever found relating all these particles' masses. No formula was capable of such feat. To all of the
world's eyes, it was utterly impossible; and it stayed that way since the beginning of particle physics, some one hundred and eighteen years ago.
Well, ladies and gents, today I finally come forward with a formula - the very first of its kind. It does the impossible - it finds order inside
. Today is the day I made it at least possible
to compute the mass of any given, non-virtual particle of the Standard Model, based on
its generation number, its charge class, and its spin.
It approximate the mass of anything from the electron to the top quark, including gluons and even neutrinos. And, here it is:
The formula is actually a group of equations, making it the most complex formula I've come to create. Let's explore its different components. I
think of it a bit like a car, with different devices - a motor, a direction, a transmission, breaks - which together makes the machine a workable
Let's start by the core - the Lead value (L
). This L
is a device which lets you determine three fixed values. These 3 different values
represent the mass of the tau, the top quark, and the bottom quark (the tau neutrino isn't mentioned yet, the reason being that we don't know what
its mass is yet). These three values are being used by the equation as references for the fermions of Generation 2 and Generation 1. Here, L
L = 3.785345*(1+((X^2.580742)*0.055231))
is a re-shuffling device. Since mass order do not necessarily follow the rank of the particle's electric charge, X
conversion between the two possible. And X
is equal to...
X = (3-C)-((0^C)*3)
is the particle's charge class. A note about the charge: this formula was designed to use with Phoenix-I/II Theory's preons. Meaning
is supposed to refer to the minority of preon species in the particles. In the case of an electron, with 6 majority preons but 0
minority preons, the class would be "0". In up quarks (and antiquarks), there would be 5 of majority preons of one specie and only 1 minority preon
of the other specie - thus the class would be "1". Following that logic, here are the particles for each classes:
0: electron, muon, tau, positron, anti-muon, anti-tau
1: up, charm, top, anti-up, anti-charm, anti-top
2: down, strange, bottom, anti-down, anti-strange, anti-botttom
3: neutrinos, neutral bosons
I know that not much people subscribe to the Phoenix-I/II Theory, so in the case one is amongst this group, I've included a conversion formula with
which one can deduce the value of C
C = (1-C')/0.333333
is the charge of the particle - drop the "-" sign if there's one (example: "-1/3" becomes "0.333333").
Back to the topic: Once the value of L
has been computed, then comes the time to find out what the value of the variable I'
" stands for "interval". The idea is that all fermions of the standard model are placed on an interval value relative to the Lead
. A bit like music: once you know the value, in cents, of a note, all you have to do is apply the interval value to this note to obtain the
perfect forth, or a minor third. Except that here we'll be working with mass instead of cents and particles instead of notes.
To find the interval of a particle is no easy matter - in fact, this part is the hardest and it took me months
to figure it out. But I did most
of the job, all you need now is a scientific calculator. The Interval [I'] is equal to...
I' = ((2-(0.5*C))^(2-Gen))*((2/Gen)*I")
is of course the charge class which I mentioned earlier, and Gen
is the particle's generation.
In the case of an electron, the Class will be "0", and the Gen will be "1". In the case of a top quark, the Class will be "1", and the Gen will
be "3". Et cetera.
Now notice there is a device called I"
. This is because as we hop from one generation to another, different algorithms are put into effect
and/or turned off (aka, their value drop to zero). This means that the formula above can adapt itself and engage the correct algorithm, depending upon
which Generation is being requested. The I"
variable is part of this mechanism, and is absolutely necessary for the formula to work properly.
And here's how to compute its value:
I" = I'"*((Y-C)-((0^C)*3))
is designed to always return the value of "1", except when the particle is from Generation 3 - in which case it'll turn to zero,
overriding the whole interval computation, and thus stating that to get the mass of the particle relative to the Lead Value, you don't have to do
anything to the Lead Value, since it is equal to itself in the first place. I'"
is equal to...
I'" = 1-(0^(3-Gen))
Now the value Y
could be simply be replaced by the number 5
if you were in a hurry and didn't mind about accuracy. But its true value
occillates, sometimes it can get at 4.995 or at 5.189, depending on the particle. Y
give the formula its accuracy, and goes like this:
Y = (((2*(0^(Gen-1)))*Z)+((Gen-1)*10.310))-Z
is a variable equal to...
Z = 4.995*(1+(0.001801*(C^4.429988)))