  # Kuyukov Vitaly

Members

15

0 Neutral

• Rank
Quark

## Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

1. it is not a wave function of particles. it is a spherical wave function. The main reason for the isotropy of space-time is the isotropy of the wave function of the universe relative to the observer. $$\psi=e^{i t R}=e^{i t \sqrt{x^2+y^2+z^2}}$$
2. Modern general theory of relativity considers gravity as the curvature of space-time. The theory is based on the principle of equivalence. All bodies fall with the same acceleration in the gravitational field, which is equivalent to locally accelerated reference systems. In this article, we will affirm the concept of gravity as the curvature of the relative wave function of the Universe. That is, a change in the phase of the universal wave function of the Universe near a massive body leads to a change in all other wave functions of bodies. The main task is to find the form of the relative wave function of the Universe, as well as a new equation of gravity for connecting the curvature of the wave function and the density of matter It is remarkable that the change in the phase of the universal wave function of the Universe as the main diriger leads to a change in the phases of the wave functions of all other particles in the Universe. Which leads to the equivalence principle and the concept of emerging gravity. In addition, gravity can be shown as the curvature of the wave function of the Universe due to the action of many particles, that is, just bodies. Consider an example for a system of two particles. For this you can use the perturbation theory. The contribution from the first particle to the gravitational time dilation and phase change of the relative wave function of the Universe. https://osf.io/qwb7e/download
3. A one-dimensional object, not a string, but objects of the type of braid or knot. Yes, gravity, because the fundamental particles are objects of quantum gravity.
4. In essence, this formula should be part of quantum gravity, so G. is included in it. According to this formula, the electron radius will be R = 10 {-27} m. Yes, it is possible to predict the mass on the basis of this formula, if the size is known, and this size is equal to the scale the great union computed by Weinberg in 1974.
5. 1. I published the full work on the Internet, called "preons, loops and the problem of hierarchy." You can get acquainted. 2. Any theory should be Lorentz covariant, a more fundamental one must include the fundamental constants, only the gravitational G. remains. 3. All masses are derived from the order of mass of the Higgs boson. But where does the Higgs mass come from? The formula gives the calculation of this mass E = 100 Gev, if the particle size is of the order of R = 10 {-29} m. This corresponds to the combining scale of all three interactions, where the particles must have a common structural description.
6. Well, you can substitute the numbers themselves, the scales converge.
7. Hi , is it not easier to find a fundamental formula for calculating the mass of elementary particles, for example, the Higgs mass. I'm sure, that such a formula exists, taking into account size analysis and a combination of fundamental fundamental constants (G, h, c) only, we get a formula where energy is inversely proportional to volume or length to the third power. $$E = \frac {G h^2}{ c^2R^3}$$ The relativistic formula is invariant, the volume is reduced, the energy grows. Now we will substitute in the formula the value of the particle energy E = 100 Gev, we get the average size of length R = 10 {-29} m. Surprisingly, the energy of a particle of the standard model is strictly related to the distance of the theory of great unification according to this formula. Moreover, this is an independent result obtained by a pure formula. This is clearly something fundamental, the formula relates energy to the distance of the theory of great unification, on this scale the particles must have a structure, this is their size. My guess is topological knots or braids. The denser the knot, the higher the energy of the particle.
8. I'm trying to explain. Obviously there is a language problem. First, there are no contradictions in the dimensions of the first formula, everything converges there, if the entropy is dimensionless (according to Shannon, bits). Second, this naturally new formula raises questions, sometimes trivial. Thirdly, it is really difficult to understand if you do not know the current results of Beckenstein-Hawking. I repeat once again, there are no any contradictions in the dimension of the first formula, carefully consider.
9. Von Neumann entanglement entropy and Shannon entropy are dimensionless
10. Perhaps time can be expressed as $$t=\frac{Gh}{c^4} \int \frac{dS}{r}$$ Where S is the entropy of entanglement of an arbitrary closed surface. r is the radius to the surface point. Integration over a closed surface. This is very similar to the analogy. Time behaves as a potential, and entropy as a charge. From this formula there are several possible consequences. Bekenstein Hawking entropy for the event horizon. Light cone case $$ct=r$$ $$S=\frac{c^3r^2}{Gh}$$ Gravitational time dilation. The case if matter inside a closed surface processes information at the quantum level according to the Margolis-Livitin theorem. $$dI=\frac{dMc^2t}{h}$$ $$\Delta t=\frac{Gh}{c^4} \int \frac{dI}{r}=\frac{GM}{rc^2}t$$ The formula is invariant under Lorentz transformations. If this definition is substituted instead of time, then the interval acquires a different look, which probably indicates a different approach of the Minkowski pseudometric with a complex plane $$s^2=(l^2_{p} \frac{S}{r})^2-r^2$$ $$l^2_{p}=\frac{Gh}{c^3}$$ Is such an interpretation possible? Sincerely, Kuyukov V.P. 1812.0145v1.pdf
×