Magnetic Monopoles Continued, and I Accept your Apology Andy
- From: "Jay R. Yablon" <jyablon@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2005 02:18:40 GMT
On September 11, 2005 at 9:03 AM, Andrej Inopin Wrote:
>Dear Jay Yablon.
>
> I want to apologise for my "too personal" style of comments, which
> I made recently regarding your good ms about Magnetic Monopoles.
> The physical content of my comments is remained correct, but personal
> notes should be omitted.
>
> I'm sorry, Andy Inopin, PhD
To my dear former teacher and collaborator Dr. Andrej Inopin:
Thank you, and I accept. Now, let's talk about science.
I am continuing Muser's magnetic monopole thread with a new thread, since
the old one is getting overloaded. There are two remaining questions /
comments you raised about my recent paper at
http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0508257.
Post #47, you said:
> There is another interesting comment/query to your M.Monopoles paper.
> Why you didn't consider to present the precise r_vector -dependence
> for your monopole solutions, and even make a corresponding plot?
>
> Do you have a kern in your Monopole? Is it similar to Dirac-monopole,
> or to t'Hooft-Polyakov monopole , or is it completely different
> creature ?
MY REPLY:
My magnetic monopole is a completely different creature from Dirac-monopole,
or the t'Hooft-Polyakov monopole. But it is a creature we will all
recognize:
The long-sought "magnetic monopole" is not a fermion or other particle
distinct from the electrons and the quarks, but is A CHARGE CARRIED BY THE
KNOWN ELECTRONS AND QUARKS THEMSELVES! It is very much like the "Z" neutral
current charge of electroweak theory. Similarly to the "Z" charge, this
magnetic monopole charge only manifests its interactions at
sufficiently-high energy, and its interactions do not respect chiral
symmetry. So, what we are looking for -- and I will soon post detailed
cross sections and width calculations, please be patient -- is a heretofore
unobserved interaction of the known fermions, and NOT some new exotic
fermion or other particle.
So, whatever we know about the electrons and the quarks -- their masses,
their wavefunctions, etc., applies to my magnetic monopoles. They are NOT
distinct particles. They are a particular type of charge carried by the
known Fermions which manifests itself in interaction with a vector bosons
that has a mass of about 2.35 TeV -- if we assume (see my paper, final
section) that the vev for duality is the same 246 GeV Fermi vev of weak
interactions.
Let me be as clear as I can be: The idea of a "magnetic monopole" as an
*independent charge analogous to* the electron or the quarks is a FICTION.
Such an *independent* charge does not exist in nature. But, this charge
does exist. It is a charge carried by the *known fermions*, manifested in
the high energy interactions of the known fermions and mediated by a vector
boson with an approximate mass of 2.35 GeV (again, based on the vev
assumption, and scaling linearly with the vev otherwise). I believe
(certainly I hope) we will soon observe this interaction as we penetrate the
TeV range in out newest accelerators.
I soon hope to show in great mathematical detail why I have reached this
conclusion. Just, please, give me some time to finish my writeup and
complete a full set of cross-section calculations for low, medium, and high
s=q^2.
Now on to POST #48 where you said:
> I compared mass formulas for t'Hooft-Polyakov monopole and Yablon
> monopole, and they are quite different:
>
> 1) H-P approximate formula gives M ~ M_w/alpha ~ 11 TeV
>
> where M_w is vector boson mass, alpha = 1/137
>
> 2) Yablon formula gives M = (vev)* SQRT(pi/4alpha) ~ 2.55 TeV,
> where vev = vacuum expectation value.
>
> So, both formulas have CRUCIAL difference on alpha-dependence of
> Monopole mass, being 1/alpha for t'Hooft-Polyakov and
> SQRT(1/alpha) for Yablon.
>
> Although I think, those are somewhat different theories, still such
> drastic difference in mass formulas is a BIG PUZZLE!
>
> It's interesting that both estimates - 2.5 TeV and 11 TeV are
> within LHC reach.
Yes, this is a difference. That is why we do experiments. In the end
nature decides which theory is correct. What a wonderful way to do things!
We should all be humbled.
I want to make very clear that the mass I predict is closer to 2.35 TeV once
the run up of the electromagnetic coupling for three generation to ~1/126 at
TeV is considered, and that this the mass of a mediating vector boson, not
the magnetic monopoles themselves. Again, the magnetic monopoles are not
independent particles, but are a charge for the known fermions so for
example, the fermion with a magnetic monopole charge of -1 is the electron
itself with a .511 MeV mass. And, again, 2.35 TeV assumes that the vev for
duality is the Fermi vacuum 246.220 GeV. A different vev for duality would
give a different mass, scaled linearly up or down. I will preview for you
also that the electrons and quarks interact via their magnetic charge in a
manner that does NOT respect chiral symmetry / conserve parity, again like
the Z current. And that the full width of this vector boson (again with the
vev assumption) is a whopping 98.6 TeV with a very tiny .03 pb full cross
section for s=(2.35 TeV)^2 for e-bar e --> mu-bar mu type decay (I have not
finished the quark , i.e., --> q-bar q calculations yet). And, I will
preview, as I did in my last paper, that the vector bosons which mediate
magnetic-monopole-type interactions in weak and strong interactions are
predicted to be about 1.3 TeV and 436 GeV, which is very close to mass
events that have been reported out of the Tevatron already. I will provide
guidance so that the accelerator folks can look for certain properties and
see if these already-detected events are in fact strong and weak interaction
magnetic monopole events.
I look forward with anticipation to seeing what nature has to say to all of
us through our newest accelerators in the US and Europe.
Jay.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Prev by Date: Re: Single photon location
- Next by Date: Re: magnetic monopoles
- Previous by thread: Re: Invariant Galilean Transformations (FAQ) On All Laws
- Next by thread: Re: Magnetic Monopoles Continued, and I Accept your Apology Andy
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
