Black Holes
26 particles
Elementary particles?
What is mass?
Handedness!!
Mathematical Knots
Axioms of QFT
Theories Of Everything!
Our Big Bang 
ACHENBACH
Ir. M.T. de Hoop
Born on: 13081965
in Delft
Lion
Final
Conclusions:
Einstein's
CAP
demands all elementary particles to be described extended in
the 2Dplane orthogonal
to the direction of motion.
This extendedness explains the
QM
spin completely. The elementary
spinless (scalar)
Higgs
particle is fiction
due to not taking into account the
gravitational action in any
QM analysis!
All 2Dstring theories
are mathematical wrong, because these theories assume a
more then
4Dspacetime,
of which 6 or
7 are contracted to the
Plancklength!
in a socalled
CalabiYau manifold.
Moreover,
Superstring only is valid if
SuperSymmetry is valid.
SuperSymmetry contradicts any valid
nonreducible description of physics on all aspects!
Albert Einstein:
If you can't explain it
simply,
you júst
don't understand it wellenough!
GR CAP => QM =>
TOE
=>
QM

Quantum
Mechanics
NB!
At all Universities
QM models use an
analyzed not even (required necessary) Complete NonReducible setof easy
linear, i.e. "mathematical",
PointParticles analyses. As a direct
result these models
have to use math. nonlogical socalled "intrinsic" properties related to
the analyzed 26 different stable “Quantum
Particles” in our 3 FermiFamilies universe!
All
stable (elem. or compound) math. "quantized"
Particles always possess Energy ÷
Frequency f, E =
h ·
f:
Always required
Energies
> 0 of
Quantum Particles already
implies
NOT Pointlike Spacetimelike
extensiveness with required Ideal Harmonic Oscillating Properties!
& All
elementary particles also have Conserved (experimentalproven)
NonZero AngularMomentum in the DirectionofMotion
(Helicity
of the
CAPdual
2 orthogonal
zero restmass bosons {Graviton &
Photon} &
Chirality in all other “massive”cases) related
to their "oscillating" energies usually called
Spin, which
in
QM
is incorrectly assumed to be an
intrinsic
property of stable analyzable
QM
pointlike objects.
In line
with Albert Einstein's theory of
General
Relativity any valid math. model of reality must comply to the
Comprehensive Action Principle, i.e.
always include the dependent,
so also required,
(orthogonal
ónly elem. symmetrical spin 2)
Gravitationalfield!
NB
Albert Einstein never realized these "difficult"
QM
requirements of his developed
CAP himself, because he didn't like the nonlogical behavior of these in his "math." linear logicaleyes really
misunderstood “Stupid Statistical”
Quantum
Mechanical
analyses of reality!
Einstein's 1^{st}
Nobelprize of the PhotoElectric effect
proofs that the
EMfield
is CN represented by
Photons,
but he
disliked the used simple PointParticles analyses of
QM, even though all
particles have Energy proportional to a Frequency.
Therefore, to analyze “Quantum
Mechanics” CN (math.) Logical Consistently compliant to the
CAP, stable elementary and
CAPdual
otherwise stable compound “Particles”
must be described CN as math. dual (orthogonal in 2 different
ways*) ideal oscillating identities:
Ideal Harmonic
Oscillating math. PointWaves in
the 2DPlane* Perpendicular to the DirectionofMotion (SR worldline)
with
CAP dual
Open
or Closed Boundary Conditions.
(1)
As a direct result
elementary
particles must
have Energy proportional to a Frequency & Conserved
nonzero
AngularMomentum in
the directionofmotion
(Helicity
of the
CAPdual
2 perpendicular zero restmass bosons {Graviton & orthogonal
Photon} &
Chirality in all other “massive”cases). The lastproperty is usually
called
spin (in
the directionofmotion) as an incorrectly assumed socalled “intrinsic”
property of elementary always analyzed math. PointParticles in the
still notunderstood
socalled
QM
A
CAPdual
logical (math.) CN theory where all possible particles with all their required
extended properties are explicitly described & explained CN according to (1) to
math. logically explain
QM
spin
math. necessary solved in the resulting Complex HilbertSpace of
QM.
CAP dual,
forcefields are either elementary
spin 2 Symmetrical described by the
orthogonal, so invisible, masses > 0  related Graviton or analyzable spin 1 AntiSymmetrical
nonzero
chargedensity related forcefields, described by socalled
GaugeSymmetries. The CN GaugeSymmetry of 4DSpacetime &
CAP dual 4DMomentumenergy analyses are just the always
used GaugeSymmetries of the
StandardModel:
U(1) x SU(2) x SU(3): U(1) x SU(2)
describe the U(1) –
EMfield CN describing the Photon with it's (spin) 1 x (antisymmetrical) 6
= 6 degreesoffreedom and the 3 SU(2) – GaugeSymmetry both charged (nonzero
chargedensities) and massive (restmasses > zero) weak nuclear force bosons {W^{±},
Z} mixed by the
Weinbergangle. The last possible GaugeSymmetry, SU(3) describes the
3 FermiFamilies with only different restmasses resulting into
CAP dual
2 x 3 = 6 different spin 1½ socalled
Quarks
{(up,
down), (strange,
charm), (top,
bottom)}, which in the also notunderstood
socalled
Quantum ChromoDynamics of
QM
are incorrectly
assumed to be (stable) spin ½ fermions with as a direct result of that
also required socalled also dual (spin
±½)
Isospin ½!
Here it must be noted that compliant to the
CAP all possible math. expressions of reality must be described with
stable elementary Leptons &
CAPdual
compound spin ½ fermions, i.e.
Baryons,
the primarysources of all bosons. Fermions are described with Open
Boundary Conditions & Bosons must be described with ClosedBC also
read expression (1).
This math. explicitly described
(CAP dual)
conserved
spin (in the
directionofmotion) atonce makes
it evident that still assumed to be valid
elementary
spinless bosons (Higgs
mechanism) which as a
direct result just can
not carry energy proportional to a
frequency
must be
discarded as a math. incorrect
assumption!
Last change:
01022020 18:43:22 