All the lepton masses from G, pi, e

  • Thread starter arivero
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Lepton Pi

Multiple poll: Check all you agree.

  • Logarithms of lepton mass quotients should be pursued.

    Votes: 21 26.6%
  • Alpha calculation from serial expansion should be pursued

    Votes: 19 24.1%
  • We should look for more empirical relationships

    Votes: 24 30.4%
  • Pythagorean triples approach should be pursued.

    Votes: 21 26.6%
  • Quotients from distance radiuses should be investigated

    Votes: 16 20.3%
  • The estimate of magnetic anomalous moment should be investigated.

    Votes: 24 30.4%
  • The estimate of Weinberg angle should be investigated.

    Votes: 18 22.8%
  • Jay R. Yabon theory should be investigate.

    Votes: 15 19.0%
  • I support the efforts in this thread.

    Votes: 43 54.4%
  • I think the effort in this thread is not worthwhile.

    Votes: 28 35.4%

  • Total voters
  • #491
With journals, you used to get a pile of paper "reprints" to mail around to people. Now some journals instead give you an electronic copy of the paper. You're allowed to put this on your own website but it still isn't quite a public copy in that no one else is allowed to do this. I've got a paper to be published this month in IJMPD and here's what they say:

You may post the postprint on your personal website or your institution's repository, provided it is accompanied by the following acknowledgment:
Electronic version of an article published as [Journal, Volume, Issue, Year, Pages] [Article DOI] © [copyright World Scientific Publishing Company] [Journal URL]

So when you see a copy of a scientific paper on the web it's not necessarily stolen. If it's on a file sharing website that's a bad sign, but there are also papers that have been released by the journals.
  • #492
I'd say that this last remark reveals all. Either legna is mocking of the rest of the thread (which is reasonable, but perhaps and argument more to close the thread after all these years) or a part of legna is mocking of other part of self. On other hand, it is true that the relationships are, if not under 1%, at least within 3%. But it is clear that they fail on the side of simplicity, when compared to the rest of the thread.

To make people realize that one can come up with hundreds of thousands
of formulas with an equal or lower error you could introduce the following
posting requirements:

1) Every numerical coincidence posted should include the error percentage.
2) The posts should contain the "prediction power" of the "formulas"

The "prediction power" can for instance be defined by the simple formula:

[tex]\mbox{PP} ~~=~~ \frac{10^{-\frac43 S}}{\mbox{error}}[/tex]

where S is the number of symbols like 1,2,3,+,-,*/,sin,log...

The value of 1/PP is then the amount of similar complex formulas which give
an equal or better prediction, most likely to be a very big number...

Regards, Hans
Last edited:
  • #493
This thread is closed pending a moderation decision.

Update: it has been decided to leave this thread closed.
Last edited: