B Is there a formula to obtain the mass of a proton from c?

[TarbalTheLabRat]

TL;DR Summary

Is there a formula to obtain the mass of a proton.

Just as E= hc/λ is anyone aware of a mathematical formula to obtain the mass of a proton from C ?

 

[Nugatory]

There is not.

The mass of a proton is $1.67262192369(51)\times 10^{−27}$ kg, but that tells us more about how we've defined the kilogram than about protons. To get something physically significant we need a ratio that is independent of the units we're using: for example the universe would be very different if the mass of a proton were not greater than the mass of the electron by a factor of 1836 and change.

 

[TarbalTheLabRat]

What do you think of this? I know where and what this comes from. Been blistered a lot on forums up to now. So I'm hesitant to state anything else. But this seems to point to being the mass.

 

[Nugatory]

What do you think of this?

Meaningless numerology because it depends on your choice of units. That’s $1.670\times 10^{-27}$ of what?

 

[TarbalTheLabRat]

It's actually Kg I believe. The same formula also appears to give the Mass of the neutron when 3 is replaced with pi.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Were these true before the kilogram was invented? Were they true before mankind evolved? Were they true before the Earth formed?

 

[Nugatory]

It's actually Kg I believe.

And that is how we know that there is no physical significance to any of this. Suppose that human history on Earth had followed a very slightly different course, so that the French revolution fizzled, the metric system was never developed and the kilogram was never invented, far less used used to describe the mass of the proton... Then we wouldn't find anything interesting about the number $1.670\times 10^{-27}$.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Been blistered a lot on forums up to now.

As you should.

`1. It's innumerate nonsense. The left-hand side has units of s/m and the right hand side has units of kilograms.
B. The proton mass doesn't work out. Sure you get four digits right, but m(p) is known to about 11.
III. The neutron mass doesn't work out either. It's about 100x worse than the proton.
d. You came in here claiming to have a question, but you really wanted to push this idea. Kind of disingenuous, don't you think?

 

[TarbalTheLabRat]

I don't have a clue. I'm actually a programmer and started looking at physics programatically about a year ago. And just over the past couple of weeks a system has evolved that's just spitting out very simple and somewhat elegant formulas that equate to many constants/other known values and describe pretty much everything from gravity to time and mass to energy. I believe a lot of issues are a by-product of our units of measurement. It's probably nothing new, but it is still pretty cool to look at as I'm organizing it. Though I must say, it is very odd that all these numbers are coming out the way they are. I'm also thinking they are implying that the universe is pressurized (in a sense) with gravity and mass is like a pinhole. Just a hypothesis. But no, I do not have a clue if it was set up this way or not. It's most likely an artifact of how our units of measurements are aligned with one another.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Suppose that human history on Earth had followed a very slightly different course, so that the French revolution fizzled, the metric system was never developed and the kilogram was never invented

Ah, but this is telling us that in all universes the kilogram would eventually be invented. It's fate, I tells ya!

 

[Nugatory]

OK, enough. This thread is closed.