One universe from the alpha 1/N

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">[Quantoken]
The SI units have names, like mass is kilogram, length is meter, time is second. Unfortunately the natural units I defined do NOT have names yet. Their English names have not been invented. So it is impossible for me to spell out the natural unit names in my formula in plain English.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
What do you mean your natural units don't have names yet? What do you think "m0" is? Or "E0"? These look like names to me.

Maybe what you mean is you don't LIKE these names? I agree, but they are still useable for teaching your idea to others.

Here is a suggestion: since you call your unit system "natural units", make a prefix from the initials and call your stuff names like "nuMeter"and "nuSecond". Then your conversion table will look like this:

* 1 (nuGram) = 1.2483x10^-25 (gram)
* 1 (nuJoule) = 1.121928x10^-11 (joule)
* 1 (nuMeter) = 2.81794x10^-15 (meter)
* 1 (nuSecond) = 9.39964x10^-24 (second)

(Abbreviations? nuGr, nuJ, nuM, nuS)
(Standard prefixes? 1000 nuMeter =&gt; 1 kiloNuMeter, or 1 kNuM)

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">[Quantoken]
But it is not necessary, all I need to tell you is it's in natural units, and you should be able to do the same calculation.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

I guess you must be smarter than I am. Hmmm, maybe an example will help. Would you show me how to calculate N from G? (Please show your work so I can follow along.)


Regards,
LB

OK, let me give you the example of how to calculate N from G using natural unit.

Find physics constant values from:
physics.nist.gov/cuu/Constants/index.html

In SI unit:
G = 6.6742 x 10-11 m3 kg-1 s-2

Here the dimentions meter, kg, second all needs to be converted to natural units. Let me call the natural length, mass, time units
nuLength, nuMass, nuTime, or nL, nM, nT:

1 nuLength [nL] = r0 = 2.81794x10^-15 meter
1 nuMass [nM] = m0 = 1.2483x10^-28 kg
1 nuTime [nT] = t0 = 9.39964x10^-24 second

Correspondingly:
1 meter = 1/2.81794x10^-15 = 3.5487x10^14 nL
1 kg = 1/1.2483x10^-28 = 8.011x10^27 nM
1 second= 1/9.39964x10^-24 = 1.06387x10^23 nT

So:
G = 6.6742 x 10-11 * (meter^3) / ((kg^1) * (second^2))
= 6.6742x10^-11 * (3.5487x10^14 nL)^3 /((8.011x10^27 nM) * (1.06387x10^23 nT)^2)
= 6.6742x10^-11 * (3.5487x10^14)^3 /(8.011x10^27 * (1.06387x10^23 )^2) [nL^3 nM^-1 nT^-2]
= 3.2896x10^-41 [nL^3 nM^-1 nT^-2]

Correspondingly:
G = 1/(2N)
N = (1/2)/G = 0.5 * G^-1 nL^3 nM^-1 nT^-2
= 0.5 / 3.2896x10^-41
= 1.52x10^40

Remember N is dimentionless (unit-less). The N from G is slightly larger than the N derived from alpha, the fine structure constant. I attribute it to we do not know the precise measurement of G, due to our technology limitation or the fact that we measure G in the gravitational field of the solar system and the galaxy.

The important thing to remember is I obtained the exact CMB temperature from alpha, matching CMB temperature to an accuracy of 0.025% is an undisputable success of my theory. Since alpha would not change. CMB temperature would not change over time either.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
[Quantoken]
So:
G = 6.6742 x 10-11 * (meter^3) / ((kg^1) * (second^2))
= 6.6742x10^-11 * (3.5487x10^14 nL)^3 /((8.011x10^27 nM) * (1.06387x10^23 nT)^2)
= 6.6742x10^-11 * (3.5487x10^14)^3 /(8.011x10^27 * (1.06387x10^23 )^2) [nL^3 nM^-1 nT^-2]
= 3.2896x10^-41 [nL^3 nM^-1 nT^-2]

Correspondingly:
G = 1/(2N)
N = (1/2)/G = 0.5 * G^-1 nL^3 nM^-1 nT^-2
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Your meaning in the last line above is not clear. It is reasonable to assume that you mean for the units of G to move with G to the denominator as it changes sides.

Suggestion - to minimize ambiguity, use parenthetical grouping like you would in a computer program (you are already doing this occasionally, so just do it more):

N = (1/2)/G = 0.5 * (G [nL^3 nM^-1 nT^-2])^-1

or

N = (1/2)/G = 0.5 / (G [nL^3 nM^-1 nT^-2])


<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
[Quantoken]
= 0.5 / 3.2896x10^-41
= 1.52x10^40

Remember N is dimentionless (unit-less).
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

???

What did you do with the units? You can't just throw them out.

At this stage of the calculation the RHS of the equation ( 1/2G ) has units of [nM*nT^2/nL^3]. The only way for the equation to balance is if the LHS ( N ) has the same units as the RHS.


N = 0.5 / ( 3.2896x10^-41 [nL^3 nM^-1 nT^-2] )

N = 1.52x10^40 [nM*nT^2/nL^3]



Regards,
LB

The unit is not important. You can use the British unit sets of foot and pound, or the SI unit of meter and kilogram. There will be no physics by picking up another arbitrary unit sets.

What's important is I discovered the correct NATURAL unit set. The keyword is NATURAL, not "unit". The natural unit set naturally leads to HBAR and C's numerical value equals to one, and it tells us the scale at which time and space becomes discrete. This is not an arbitrary unit set. This is the unit the nature uses.

The establishment science community has their natural unit set, which is called Planck Scale, which is obtained by setting the numerical value of HBAR and C as well as G equal to one. Unfortunately it's totally wrong. And that mistake leads to the so called cosmological constant problem: No matter what way or how they tried, their calculation always leads to a result some 120 orders of magnitude too larger than the actual value. Throughout human history of calculation, there hasn't been another case where one's calculation is off by a bigger margin of discrepancy.

It's perfectly right to set HBAR and C to one in order to try to obtain the natural unit, since these two are true microscopic physics constants. But it is wrong to set G to one, because G is a macroscopic parameter, not a microscopic constant.

To see why it's wrong, let see we create a "natural" set of units by setting HBAR, C, and the height of Quantoken to be exactly one. You would say: no, why should Quantoken's height be used, why not Larry's height. It's irrational. Try to replace it with the diameter of the earth, it is just as irrational. That's because all those parameters are macroscopic numbers and they have no significance in the microscopic world.

Same is true with G. You would thought G is real microscopic constant reflecting how small particles like electron and proton attracts each other gravitationally, on top of other interactions. But that's wrong. G is NOT a microscopic constant. Gravity is a manifestation effect by the whole mass of the universe. So gravity is really NOT a constant, but merely a parameter that could tell us how big the universe is.

Which we could see from the fact that the big number N gives us everything of the universe: The radius or the age of the universe is PI times N. The mass/energy is PI times N squared. The Hawking entropy is PI times the 4-D sphere surface area, which is proportional to N cubic. Mean while, G is the inverse of 2N. Clearly, G reflects the overall space time curvature of the universe.

There are so many "coincidences" that needs serious explanation: Why the radius and age happen to be PI times N while at the same time the mass/energy hapen to PI times N's second power, instead of something like PI*N^1.353285795? Why G happen to be the half of the inverse of the same N. And why the N is associated with fine structure constant alpha in such a simple relationship:
N = PI * exp (2/(3*alpha))
And, finally, why another constant g, which is associated with alpha as well, gives the exact baryon density of the universe (5.4383%). And together they leads to a CMB temperature value which matches perfectly with the precise measured value? And why they leads to the correct value of the Sun's radiation strength as well? At the mean time, calculation using the Sun's radiation as an average also leads to the correct CMB temperature.

All those are NOT coincidences. I have a whole new theory that explains everything naturally, and makes predictions which other theories can not, and which can be and have been precisely verified by experimental data. And my theory explains the cosmologocal constant and the vacumm energy problems that existing science can not explain, among other things.

And I haven't even started to talk about my theory yet. I just gave out a few of my precise calculations here. They don't just come out of a wild guess, they are the naturally and uniquely derived result from my theory.

My theory, I call The "Generalized Universal Information Theory And Relativity" (GUITAR), is based on the belief that the fundamental element of existance in the universe is quantum information, not mass, energy, charge, etc. And even space and time are no longer fundamental. The only fundamental thing is quantum information, which is a finite and conserved quantity in the universe. Spacetime, mass, energy, etc, are all statistical properties. The statistical nature of most physics quantities leads to the uncertainty principle and other oddity in quantum physics.

My theory, GUITAR, has successfully resolves the conflict between gravity and quantum effects. It will naturally leads to General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics at macroscopic scale and microscopic scale, respectively. It's the true theory of everything.

To establishment scientists, at this moment, I have just one advice: Gravity does NOT occur and does NOT exist in the microscopic world, nor does spacetime continuum at scale smaller than the radius of electrons. So be careful do NOT use G in any theory related to microscopic quantum efects. Both superstring theory and loop quantum gravity are bound to fail at the end, as long as you continue to use G in your calculations.

Quantoken

N = 1.52x10^40 [nM*nT^2/nL^3]
N &lt;&gt; 1.52x10^40