Smilga paper, in which he derives an estimate to the fine structure constant

Tron3k
Messages
45
Reaction score
0
I've been trying to figure out this paper by W. Smilga: Spin foams, causal links, and geometry-induced interactions

I don't have the knowledge and background to be able to determine whether his derivation of an estimate to the fine structure constant is interesting, or just a trick.

I am referring to XIV: Estimate of the Coupling Constant. Through some mathematics I don't understand yet, he gets a value for the fine structure constant of 1/137.03608245, which agrees to the real value "in five parts in ten-million".

What is the consensus of the physics community on this? Is it just numerology?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Tron3k said:
I've been trying to figure out this paper by W. Smilga: Spin foams, causal links, and geometry-induced interactions

I don't have the knowledge and background to be able to determine whether his derivation of an estimate to the fine structure constant is interesting
no way. no f-ing way. When Eddington went crazy he started trying to do that too.
 
What is amusing is that the calculation is presented as a vindication of Tony's models.
 
To save some time:

Smilga says that it rederivates Wyler formula, which is claimed to be a quotient of volumes
<br /> 8 \pi^2 {V(D_5)^{1/4} \over V(S_4) V(C_5)}<br />
to be compared with \alpha / \pi

The objects C_5,D_5,S_4 being some symmetric spaces. These volumes are claimed to evaluate, respectively, to {8 \pi^3 \over 3}, {\pi^5 \over 2^4 5!}, {8 \pi^2 \over 3}
 
Last edited:
I seem to notice a buildup of papers like this: Detecting single gravitons with quantum sensing. (OK, old one.) Toward graviton detection via photon-graviton quantum state conversion Is this akin to “we’re soon gonna put string theory to the test”, or are these legit? Mind, I’m not expecting anyone to read the papers and explain them to me, but if one of you educated people already have an opinion I’d like to hear it. If not please ignore me. EDIT: I strongly suspect it’s bunk but...
Back
Top