Hyperspace engine (Heim's Quantum Theory)

[Vanadium 50]

Providing so many insignificant figures seems a bit strange, but on the other hand it makes no sense to assume that by these numbers, the author provides a falsification of the theory he is actually proposing.

It also makes no sense to think that the author doesn't write the number he means. If one looks at an example where everything is left of the decimal point it's easier to see: if someone says to me "There are six billion and three people on the Earth", isn't it more natural to conclude that he real means 6,000,000,003 and not "some number around six billion"?

Furthermore, doesn't that beg the question of where the uncertainties actually are?

As far as the number of neutrinos and their lifetimes, the measurement is independent of their lifetimes.

 

[Orbb]

It also makes no sense to think that the author doesn't write the number he means. If one looks at an example where everything is left of the decimal point it's easier to see: if someone says to me "There are six billion and three people on the Earth", isn't it more natural to conclude that he real means 6,000,000,003 and not "some number around six billion"?

Furthermore, doesn't that beg the question of where the uncertainties actually are?

I agree. However, an uncertainty of ~0,1 MeV is admitted, so I'm still led to the conclusion that only the first figure right to the decimal point can be considered significant. (As the mass formula has been evaluated numerically, i could imagine that these are the precise results of a formula that only approximates reality, pasted into the given tables without any further editing.)

As far as the number of neutrinos and their lifetimes, the measurement is independent of their lifetimes.

Besides the additional neutrinos, Heim's theory also predicts a neutral electron and some other unobserved particles. Given the success of the other predictions, i would regard this as an indication of incompleteness only - other unifying theories professionally researched can give an arbitrary number of unphysical predictions in their current form, and still they are assumed to be incomplete, and not automatically wrong.

Another example is Heim's prediction of "omicron" particles with mass around 1500 MeV. One of its resonances is at 2137,4 MeV, which appears to be the Ds-Particle discovered by SLAC in 2003, which was found to have precisly this mass.

 

[MG_50]

Hello. I'm new to this forum, and I have been reading through this thread.

The last post appears to be Jan. 2009, and the ongoing discourse seems incomplete. Is this thread still active, or has it moved somewhere else? Thanks.

 

[mestar]

I have question :
What happens when a object with speed greater then a lights in vacuum is under effect of centripetal force?

 

[Dr_Zinj]

I agree. However, an uncertainty of ~0,1 MeV is admitted, so I'm still led to the conclusion that only the first figure right to the decimal point can be considered significant. (As the mass formula has been evaluated numerically, i could imagine that these are the precise results of a formula that only approximates reality, pasted into the given tables without any further editing.)

Welcome to the cut and paste world of Microsoft Excel. Most spreadsheet applications don't do calculations based on significant figures; and even when formatted to display only significant figures, still store the number as it was calculated. So you may see 4.5, but what you cut and paste comes out as 4.4567890123 instead.

I wonder how much scientific research has been hampered by poor editing and recording skills?