Next Note for UFT224

Agreed with Sean MacLachlan of Hewlett Packard. The claim to haev observed a Higgs boson is clearly meaningless, and I will think about the further development of the strong field theory together with Horst Eckardt and Douglas Lindstrom and others. We have made some progress into this already. The feedback over nine years shows that the entire scientific community has rejected the idea of the Higgs boson.

In a message dated 17/07/2012 00:39:49 GMT Daylight Time:

I think you’re right it’s time to develop a new unified particle physics theory that’s rigorously self consistent and consistent with our measurements not adjustable or unobservable parameters.

On Jul 16, 2012, at 1:57 AM, EMyrone wrote:

In the notes and discussion for UFT224 it has been shown already that the Higgs boson is a total nonsense because of 19 – 27 adjustable parameters, meaning an endless number of parameters in computational quantum mechanics of such a “particle”, a very dubiously observable lifetime of ten power minus twenty seconds, a vacuum density that is about fity seven orders of magnitude too large, a U(1) sector riddled with self contradictions and random assertions in the SU(2)xU(1) sector. The degenerate vacua of the Higgs mechanism can never be observed, so the entire idea is non Baconian, i.e. unscientific. So a Nobel prize is going to be purchased with influence costing several billion dollars, and like Macbeth, signifies nothing. Is this physics? In the next note I will review the old problem that the most general Lorentz transform of a massless particle produces total nonsense, the E(2) group (see L. H. Ryder, “Quantum Field Theory”, Cambridge UP 1996, 2nd edition). I recommend listening to and reading the essays on which refute the standard model in an endless number of ways, then go on the many refutation papers in the UFT section and papers by the colleagues. The world of real physics does this all the time.

%d bloggers like this: