Re: Lorentz violation of the Standard Model

Dear Clmasse,

Thank your for replying my post.
Since your remark is rather short, I don't full understand your point
and I have a couple of thing to clarify.

Yes, my article is clearly based on the fundamentality of Dirac equations.

In fact, what your statement implies the idea that the Dirac equations are
not completely fundamental equations to determine the properties of
fermions, but it requires some other explanation of Higgs field. If that is
where the SM stands at, then it should Cleary state that "the Dirac equation
is not fundamental, but the Higgs mechanism is more fundamental one",
but no where in the SM makes such a clear statement.
Do you agree that the SM denies the fundamentality of the Dirac equations?

Also, our practical understanding of fermion is mainly based on the
fundamentality
of the Dirac equations. At least, the Dirac equation is still commonly
accepted as
fundamental in most references we can find including textbooks. If we would
like to
deny the Dirac equations, we need a more cautious approach then the way the
Higgs mechanism has been upheld so far. After all, the Higgs mechanism has
not been verified yet and is still hypothetical as we do not have the
specific space and time information about the occurrence of symmetry
breaking. That is why I think it is
a weak argument to deny that the Dirac equations is not fundamental and at
least
it is worthy of our rigorous investigation.

Thanks,
J.C. Yoon

>
> Here, you are reasoning with the Dirac equation only. But in electroweak
> theory, it is coupled with the equation of motion of the Higgs field. You
> have therefore to reason with the full set of equations.
>
> --
> ~~~~ clmasse on free F-country
> Liberty, Equality, Profitability.
>
>

.