A Bio-Info-Digital Universe Model (BIDUM
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
1 A Bio-Info-Digital Universe Model (BIDUM, version 1.0) inspired by a Teller’s large number hypothesis overlooked by the great majority of physicists (including Tipler, Barrow, Dirac and Einstein) but also Teller himself * (Open development interval: 2008 – 2015 - ?) * Andrei Lucian Dr ăgoi 1,2,3 * Motto: "[God]: universe is nothing but a big copying machine, reproducing your thoughts [pure information] in physical form [energy/matter], that will be your experience” 4 (Neale Donald Walsch, Conversations with God, 3rd volume) Abstract „Edward Teller appears to have been the first who speculate that there may exist a logarithmic 2 -39 relation between the fine structure constant (α) and the parameter G ·mN /h ·c~10 of the form 2 -1 60 α~ln(G ·mN /h ·c) (in fact α =ln(3.17 x 10 and the formula is too insensitive to be of very much use in predicting exact relations)“ 5. I will try to demonstrate that Barrow and Tipler (but also the great majority of the physicists including those mentioned in the title) overlooked the possibility that Teller’s hypothesis (called “speculation”) may be much more inspired and profound than the Dirac’s large number hypothesis (DLNH) , as it can offer an elegant explanation both to the fine structure constant (FSC) and to DLNH (using FSC) and also can predict a Planck-like gravitational constants series and a big G series (a G “imprint” for every type of atom in any state) as a unified quantum-relativistic theory of quantum gravity that is experimentally testable. IDUM proposes an informational view on the universe in which all physical constants can be derived (at least theoretically) from just one parameter: the total information of the universe (a quantum fluctuation resulted from a huge informational input to a “nothing” 0D vacuum). In IDUM the mass-energy conservation (thermodynamics) and equivalence (Einstein) laws become the consequence of an information conservation law (which is fundamental in IDUM). IDUM tries to demonstrate that the universe can be modeled as a multi-processor quantum (gravity) computer in which all the fundamental forces are just the result of reading the same total information in different dimensional frames. 1 Romanian pediatrician partially self-educated in theoretical physics and IT 2 Email : [email protected] 3 Mailing Address : Str. Lucre țiu P ătr ăș canu, nr.3, bl. Y1, sc. 1, ap. 144, Bucharest, Romania 4 www.nytimes.com/books/first/w/walsch-god3.html 5 Barrow, John D., and Frank J. Tipler, The Anthropic Cosmological Principle. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986, p.230 and ref. no. 37 from p.29: E. Teller, Phys. Rev. 73, 801, (1948) (www.amazon.com/Anthropic-Cosmological-Principle-Oxford- Paperbacks/dp/0192821474) 2 Part 1: A fine structure constant binary logarithm coincidence series overlooked by the vast majority of physicists In the abstract mN stands for (free) nucleon (proton / neutron) rest mass. All the physical constants used in this article are based on CODATA 2012 recommendations and are all measured in SI units (see Table 1) Table 1 . The abbreviations used in this article Mn / Mp / Me (free) neutron/ proton/ electron rest mass tP / lP / mP Planck time / length / mass Qe / Ke / ε0 / the elementary charge (so that not to be confused with Euler number e) / Coulomb constant / vacuum c / Re permittivity / the speed of light in vacuum / classical electron radius α the inverse of fine structure constant 6 (abbreviation chosen for the simplicity and intelligibility of the equations): hr⋅ c α 137.036 Qe 2 4⋅π ⋅ε0 αG the inverse of gravitational coupling constant 7 (abbreviation chosen for the simplicity and intelligibility of the αGr= αG/2 π equations): 2 hr⋅ c MP αG 5.709× 10 44 2 Me G⋅ Me G The DAH -based (for DAH see below) quantum variant of the Ne wtonian universal gravitational constant (G / QG or Gq: „quantum big G”); the classical experimentally determined G will be named as GCODATA2012 h / hr / hrr Planck constant / the reduced Planck constant ( h/2 π) / the „double” reduced Planck constant ( h/4 π) ( 4π is a Moebius-like double-circle complete cycle on a 4D hypersphere: a possible trajectory of the gravitons/pair of interchanged gravitons ) Eph( λ) c the energy of a single photon: Eph ()λ h λ NBE (average) nuclear binding energy (per each nucleon) (average nuclear mass defect per each nucleon) 8 ln (x) the e-base (natural) logarithm of x>0 log2(x) the 2-base (binary) logarithm of x>0. DLNH Dirac’s large number hypothesis NL -TH natural logarithm (variant of) Teller’s 9 hypothesis BL -TH binary logarithm (varian t of) Teller’s hypothesis DAH Dr ăgoi ’s alpha (constant) hypothesis (my hypothesis based on a binary logarithm subvariant of Teller ’s hypothesis) (B) IDUM (Bio -)Info -Digital Universe M odel (a model of the physical universe using DAH as main premise and based on the analogy with a multi-processor quantum computer) LMI locatio n-and -moment information LMIP location -and -moment information packs ACP (The) A nthropic Cosmological P rinciple 10 HUP Heisenberg Uncertainty principle 6 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine_structure_constant 7 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_coupling_constant 8 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_binding_energy 9 ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Teller 10 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle; en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-tuned_Universe; 3 It is clearly that using natural logarithm in the Teller’s hypothesis is „ too insensitive to be of very much use in predicting exact relations ” (see Table 2) Table 2. The „insensitive” NL-TH variant α = 137.036 h⋅ c ln 89.86 65.574 %⋅α 2 G⋅ Mn α 59 h⋅ c 39 1 α e = 3.266× 10 1.061× 10 e 2 22 G⋅ Mn 3.078× 10 % Even if Teller himself overlooked the possibility of using binary logarithm (not natural logarithm) in his hypothesis mentioned in the abstract, it is quite strange that the vast majority of physicists also overlooked this possibility from 1948 until present (I have emailed a couple of years ago Mr. Barrow and Mr. Tipler on this BL-TH variant (see Tables 3 and 4) for their book next edition review, but never received any answer). This overlooking is quite similar to the background radiation prediction that had escaped unnoticed by the majority of physicists quite a few decades. Table 3. The much more „sensitive” BL-TH variant h⋅ c log2 129.641 94.603 %⋅α 2 α = 137.036 G⋅ Mn α 41 h⋅ c 2 = 1.786× 10 1.061× 10 39 0.594 %⋅2α 2 G⋅ Mn Table 4. Other „striking sensitive” BL-TH subvariants h⋅ c log2 140.487 102.518 %⋅α α = 137.036 G⋅ Me ⋅Mp h⋅ c log2 140.485 102.517 %⋅α G⋅ Me ⋅Mn hr⋅ c log2 137.836 100.583 %⋅α G⋅ Me ⋅Mp hr⋅ c log2 137.834 100.582 %⋅α G⋅ Me ⋅Mn α 41 hr⋅ c 2 = 1.786× 10 3.109× 10 41 174.055 % 2α G⋅ Me ⋅Mp hr⋅ c 3.105× 10 41 173.816 % 2α G⋅ Me ⋅Mn hrrc⋅ 1.555× 10 41 87.028 % 2α G⋅ Me⋅Mp 4 hrrc⋅ 1.552× 10 41 86.908 % 2α G⋅ Me ⋅Mn The most striking “sensitive” BL-TH sub-variant (which I’ve called DAH in the abbreviation Table 1) (see Table 5) deserves a very special attention in my opinion as it may have great importance in formulating a quantitative description/prediction of gravitons and quantum gravity theory . I consider it very small the probability that this “too-elegant” numerical coincidence is “just” the result of pure chance. I don’t have any information from the physics literature 11 on a more sensitive theoretical numerical prediction of αg and a quantum G (including the Einstein’s famous 8 πG general relativity equation factor ) using only α (as an adimensional combination of almost all the physical constants fundamental to quantum mechanics theory). In this article I shall try to argue that the power of predicting a gravitational Planck-like constants (mass quanta) and a theoretical quantum G series (similar to the experimental G determinations and variations) makes DAH very probable to be a true non-coincidence due to a more profound undiscovered law of nature which I’ll try to demonstrate in my IDUM (a possible scale-invariance 12 law in a possible fractal universe 13 ). DAH non-coincidence suggests that FSC has a dual electrogravitational significance (with FSC being a both electromagnetic and gravitational constant). I also support Dirac’s famous quote that “if the [physical] equations are not simple and elegant, they are probably wrong.”: Koide coincidence is one (still debated) example that has successfully predicted the tauon mass within one standard deviation from its observed value. Similarly, DAH could offer an elegant explanation to DLNH. Table 5. The most striking „sensitive” BL-TH subvariant: DAH h⋅ c log2 137.0304 99.996 %⋅α 3 α = 137.036 2 2 ()4⋅π ⋅α ()G⋅ Me 2α = 1.786× 10 41 h⋅ c 1.779× 10 41 99.613 %⋅2α 3 2 2 ()4⋅π ⋅α ()G⋅ Me 3 3 3 3 h⋅ c 2 hr⋅ c 2 α 2 α+1 hrr⋅ c 2 α ()4⋅π α ⋅2α 2⋅α ⋅2 α ⋅2 α ⋅2 2 2 2 G⋅ Me G⋅ Me G⋅ Me h⋅ c 8⋅π ⋅G 3 2 2 α ⋅2α −1⋅Me 11 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant 12 en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scale_invariance ; en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logarithmic_spiral 13 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractal_cosmology 5 3 3 3 hr⋅ c 2 2 hrr⋅ c 2 α αG 2α ⋅2α α ⋅2α+1 αGr α ⋅2 2 2 G⋅ Me G⋅ Me Analogously to single λ-wavelength photon energy [ Eph( λ)], the gravitational energy of a 2 rest 2 electron/positron vacuum system (G·Me /λ) is the consequence of 2 “Ping-Pong” co-phase-graviton-packs interchange (with the speed of light in vacuum and wavelength λ) between the 2 rest electrons/positrons at the maximum frequency of emission for the electron/positron (1/ λ, with minimum λ close to the electron/positron diameter ): I shall name this pack of co-phase gravitons an electrograviton (eg ).