понедельник, 2 февраля 2015 г.


Large Hadron Collider (LHC) worked since 10 September 2008 till 14 February 2013.
Tevatron worked since 1 December 1970, till 30 September 2011. Enormous resources
were spent, but any essentially new results wasn’t received. Neither superpartners, nor
additional dimensions, neither gravitons, nor black holes. neither dark matter, nor dark
energy etc., etc. weren’t found. As for the Higgs, the assertion that the boson found in the
125 - 126 GeV, is this particle, is highly doubtful –
The Higgs field permeates the vacuum of space, which means the mass of the boson and
the stability of the vacuum are closely intertwined. Theory predicted that if the Higgs boson
is heavier than about 129 GeV, the universe should be on safe footing. The much celebrated
particle has a mass of about 126 GeV - light enough to raise fears of instability. Higgs boson
could have destroyed the cosmos shortly after it was born, causing the universe to collapse
just after the Big Bang. The experiments that detected the Higgs boson revealed it had a
mass of 125 billion electron-volts, or more than 130 times the mass of the proton. However,
this discovery led to a mystery at that mass, the Higgs boson should have destroyed the
universe just after the Big Bang. This is because Higgs particles attract each other at high
energies. For this to happen, the energies must be extraordinarily high, ”at least a million
times higher than the LHC can reach,
Right after the Big Bang, however, there was easily enough energy to make Higgs
bosons attract each other. This could have led the early universe to contract instead of
expand, snuffing it out shortly after its birth. The Standard Model of particle physics, which
scientists use to explain elementary particles and their interactions, has so far not provided
an answer to why the universe did not collapse following the Big Bang,
All well-known elementary bosons (photons, W and Z bosons, gluons) are gauge. Apparently,
the found by LHC 125-126 particle represents some hadron multiplet.
On the other hand already in 2006 - 2007 the logic analysis of these subjects described in
[1], [2] has shown that all physical events are interpreted by well-known particles (leptons,
quarks, and gauge bosons).
That is within last several decades many theoretical physicists investigated what isn’t
present in the Nature. It is the Superstrings Theory, the Higgs theory, the Dark Energy and
the Dark Matter hypotheses, etc.
”Final Book” contains development and continuation of ideas of these books.
Chapter 1 gives convenient updating of the Gentzen Natural Logic [3], a logic explanation
of space-time relations, and logical foundations of the Probability Theory. The reader
who isn’t interested in these topics, can pass this part and begin readings with Chapter 2.
Chapter 2 receives notions and statements of Quantum Theory from properties of probvabilities of physical events.
In Chapter 3 Electroweak Theory, Quarks-Gluon Theory and Gravity Theory are explained
from these properties.
For understanding of the maintenance of this book elementary knowledge in the field
of linear algebra and the mathematical analysis is sufficient.
In this edition of this book I added the subsections ”Dimension of physical space” and
”Chrome of Baryons”, and the comment to results of work the LHC.

Contents
Introduction v
1 Time, space, and probability 1
1.1. Classical propositional logic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2. Recorders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
1.3. Time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
1.4. Space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
1.5. Relativity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
1.6. Probability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
1.6.1. Events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
1.6.2. B-functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
1.6.3. Independent tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
1.6.4. The logic probability function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
1.6.5. Conditional probability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
1.6.6. Classical probability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
1.6.7. Probability and logic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
2 Quants 57
2.1. Physical events and equation of moving . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
2.2. Double-Slit Experiment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
2.3. Lepton Hamiltonian . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
2.4. Masses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
2.5. One-Mass State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
2.6. Creating and Annihilation Operators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
2.7. Particles and Antiparticles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
3 Fields 105
3.1. Electroweak Fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
3.1.1. The Bi-mass State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
3.1.2. Neutrino . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
3.1.3. Electroweak Transformations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
3.1.4. Dimension of physical space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
3.2. Quarks and Gluons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
3.3. Asymptoiic Freedom, Confinement, Gravitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159
3.3.1. Dark Energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161
3.3.2. Dark Matter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163
3.3.3. Baryon Chrome . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167
Conclusion 183
Epilogue 187
References 189
Index

Conclusion
Fundamental Theoretical Physics contains sequences of theories, each of which is explained
of previous ones by rules of the classical logic. For example, optics is absorbed by theory of
electromagnetism, classical mechanics - by special theory of relativity and quantum theory,
the theory of electromagnetism and weak interactions - by theory of electroweak interactions
of Sheldon Glashow and so on. That means that basic notions and statements of every
subsequent theory are more logical than basic notions and axioms of the preceding one.
When these basic elements of the theory become absolutely logical, i.e. when they
become notions and rules of classical logic, theoretical physics will come to an end, it will
rather be logic than physics.
—————————————————-
Any subjects, connected with an information is called informational objects. For example,
it can be a physics device, or computer disks and gramophone records, or people,
carrying memory on events of their lifes, or trees, on cuts which annual rings tell on past
climatic and ecological changes, or stones with imprints of long ago extincted plants and
bestials, or minerals, telling on geological cataclysms, or celestial bodies, carrying an information
on a remote distant past Universe, etc., etc.
It is clearly that an information, received from such information object, can be expressed
by a text which made of sentences.
A set of sentences, expressing an information of some informational object, is called
recorder of this object (p.15).
Obviously, the following conditions are satisfied:
I. A recorder does not kept logically hereafter refers to the classical propositional logic
inconsistent sentence.
II. If a recorder contains some sentence then one contains all propositional consequences
of that sentence.
+III. If recorder a contains sentence ”recorder b contains sentence A” then recorder a
contains sentence A.
For example, if recorder a contains sentence ”recorder b contains sentence ”Big Theorem
is proved” ” then recorder a contains sentence ”Big Theorem is proved”.
Some recorders systems form structures like clocks. The following results come from
the logical properties of a set of recorders (p.16)
First, all such clocks have the same direction, i.e. if an event expressed by sentence A
precedes an event expressed by sentence B according to one of such clocks then the same
for others as well (p.18).
Secondly, time, according to this clock, is irreversible, i.e. there’s no recorde which canreceive information about an event that has happened until this event really happens. Thus,
nobody can come back in past or receive information from future (p.32).
Thirdly, a set of recorders are naturally embedded into a metrical space, i.e. all four
axioms of metrical space are received from logical properties of the set of recorders (p.23).
Fourthly, if this metrical space is Euclidean, then the corresponding ”space and time”
of recorders obeys to transformations of the complete Poincare group. In this case Special
Theory of Relativity follows the logical properties of information. If this metric space is not
Euclidean then suitable non-linear geometry may be built on this space. And an appropriate
version of the General Relativity Theory can be implemented in that space-time (pp.29–48).
Therefore, basic properties of time - unidirectionality and irreversibility, metrical properties
of space and principles of the theory of relativity derive from logical properties of
the set of recorders. Thus, if you have some set of objects, dealing with information, then
”time” and ”space” are inevitable. And it doesn’t matter whether this set is included in our
world or some other worlds, which don’t have a space-time structure initially.
Such ”Time–Space” is called ”Informational Time–Space”.
Because we receive our time with our informational system then all other our times’
notions (thermodynamical time, cosmological time, psychological time, quantum time etc.)
should be defined by that Informational Time.
————————————————-
As it is well known, classical propositional logic can be formulated on the basis of the
properties of Boolean function. If the range of this function will be extended to the interval
[0, 1] of the real number axes then we shall obtain the function which has all properties
of the function of probability. Logical analogue of Law of Large Numbers in form of
Bernoulli is derived for this function. So, probability theory is a generalization of classical
propositional logic and, therefore, it is also propositional logic (pp.48–56).
—————————————————-
I consider the events, each of which can bound to a certain point in space-time. Such
events are called dot events[45]. Combinations (sums, products, supplements) of such
events are events, called physical events.
The probability density of dot events in space-time is invariant under Lorentz transformations.
But probability density of such events in space at a certain instant of time is not
invariant under these transformations. I consider the dot events for which density of probability
in space at some instant of time is the null component of a 3+1-vector function which
is transformed by the Lorentz formulas (pp.58–59).
I call these probabilities the traceable probabilities.
It is known that Dirac’s equation contains four anticommutive complex 4X4 matrices.
And this equation is not invariant under electroweak transformations. But it turns out that
there is another such matrix anticommutive with all these four matrices. If additional mass
term with this matrix will be added to Dirac’s equation then the resulting equation shall
be invariant under these transformations I call these five of anticommutive complex 4X4
matrices Clifford pentade. There exist only six Clifford pentads I call one of them the light
pentad, three - the chromatic pentads, and two - the gustatory pentads.
The light pentad contains three matrices corresponding to the coordinates of 3-
dimensional space, and two matrices relevant to mass terms - one for the lepton and one for
the neutrino of this lepton.
Each chromatic pentad also contains three matrices corresponding to three coordinates
and two mass matrices - one for top quark and another - for bottom quark.
Each gustatory pentad contains one coordinate matrix and two pairs of mass matrices -
these pentads are not needed yet (pp.59–60).
Each vector of state has its own corresponing element of the Cayley-Dickson algebra
(pp.142–145). Properties of a state vector require that this algebra was a normalized division
algebra. By the Hurwitz and Frobenius theorems maximal dimension of such algebra is 8.
Consequently, a dimension of corresponding complex state vectors is 4, and a dimension
of the Clifford set elements is 4x4. Such set contains 5 matrics - among them - 3 diagonal.
Hence, a dimension of the dot events space is equal to 3+1.
It is proven (pp.65–68, 80–82) that any square-integrable 4x1-matrix function with
bounded domain (Planck’s function) obeys some generalization of Dirac’s equation with
additional gauge members. This generalization is the sum of products of the coordinate
matrices of the light pentad and covariant derivatives of the corresponding coordinates plus
product of all the eight mass matrices (two of light and six of chromatic) and the corresponding
mass numbers.
If this equation does not contain chromatic mass numbers then we obtain Dirac’s equation
for leptons with gauge members which are similar to electroweak fields obtained for
gauge fieldsW and Z (pp.83–89, 106–139).
If this equation does not contain lepton’s and neutrino’s mass terms then we obtain the
Dirac’s equation with gauge members similar to eight gluon’s fields (pp.141 –155). And
oscillations of chromatic states of this equation bend space-time. This bend gives rise to the
effects of redshift, confinement and asymptotic freedom, and Newtonian gravity turns out
to be a continuation of subnucleonic forces (pp.155–157).
And it turns out that these oscillations bend space-time so that at large distance space
expands with acceleration according to Hubble’s law. And these oscillations bend spacetime
so that here appears the discrepancy between q uantity of the luminous matter in space
structures and the traditional picture of gravitational interaction of stars in these structures
(pp.157–162)
Thus, concepts and statements of Quantum Theory are concepts and statements of the
probability of dot events and their ensembles.
Elementary physical particles in vacuum behave as these probabilities. For example, in
accordance with doubleslit experiment.
Thus, if between event of the creating of a particle and event of the detecting of ones
here events do not occur then at this period of time this particle does not exist - here only
probability of this particle detecting in some point. But this probability, as we have seen,
obeys the equations of quantum theory, and we get the interference. But in a cloud chamber
events of condensation form a chain, meaning the trajectory of this particle. In this case the
interference disappears. But this trajectory is not continuous - each point of this line has a
neighbour point. And the effect of this particle moving arises from the fact that a wave of
probability propagates between these points.
Consequently, the elementary physical particle represents an ensemble of dot events
associated probabilities. And charge, mass, energy, momentum, spins, etc. represent parameters
of distribution of these probabilities. It explains all paradoxes of quantum physics.
Schrodinger’s cat lives easy without any superposition of states until the microevent awaitedby all occures. And the wave function disappears without any collapse in the moment when
an event probability disappears after the event occurs (pp.71–79).
Thus, the fundamental essence of nature are not particles and fields, but dot events and
connecting them probability.
————————————————–
Hence, the fundamental theoretical physics is one among of extensions of classical
propositional logic.


Комментариев нет:

Отправить комментарий