Physics in Euclidean 3D

[Konas]

Could Higgs boson be viewed as the entropic force that causes gravity?
May Higgs boson in 3D Euclidean space dynamics explain General Relativity time-space relations?
I argue on this paper that we may be able to explain GR through a particle view of QM where Higgs creates gravity by pressure entropy once consumed its Higgs (mass). I do not say it on the paper, but I would suspect it could be that mass is a property of particles that converts Higgs virtual particles to photon virtual particles.
Maybe forces its decay. I would suspect then that virtual photons would become later Higgs Bosons again, since they must be for unknown reason, more stable

http://vixra.org/abs/1304.0080
(Note, energy mass equation was a necessary modification taken from another to make it consistent with depletion of Higgs Boson limit.)

[minkwe]

Hello Konas and welcome to SPF. A few comments about your paper:

- Good idea suggesting that Higgs is a particle responsible for the repulsive force. I've myself always thought that there can be no mechanical attractive forces, only repulsive, and all attractive forces only arise as side effects of a fundamentally repulsive force. For example, two objects being pushed towards each other more strongly than they push each other away will appear to attract. I never thought to link this to the Higgs. I believe this is the path to unification, starting from the basics.

- "Entropic force"? I suggest you get rid of that terminology completely. Entropy is not ontological and can not be part of an elementary mechanics of nature. Use other words to say what you mean without the baggage that comes with the confusion of "Entropic force".

- "Higgs virtual particles to photon virtual particles". Same point as above. "Virtual" means not real. I don't know why many physicist use that word to talk about things they expect and believe to be real. Just recipe for more confusion. Find a different word for it.

- "Torne Field"?, you won't get very far naming particles/fields after yourself. Give it a meaningful non-confusing name and if the theory catches on, others might decide to reward you by naming it after you.

In any case, there is something refreshing in your ideas. In other words, on reading it, it appears to me like generally, you are almost on the right track. I'm not a fan of your treatment of time and simultaneity though.

[Ben6993]

Hi,

1) Is the higgs associated with a repulsive force? And is it pushing or was it pushed?
As the higgs causes mass by interfering with particle's motions then I guess that the higgs field must be being pushed by the particles acquiring mass.
But the higgs itself gains mass by pushing on other higgs fields, then the higgs is both pushing and pushed.

2) in Penrose's CCC model, the start of cycle has the universe located in a single bosonic state, presumably of spin 0. Entropy increases as the contents split into more and more fermionic particles and the Exclusion Principle requires those states to be distinct. Increase in entropy seems to me to be related to increase in the volume of space enclosed by the fermions. So entropy is related to the expansion. Entropy is fueled by the amount of matter/fields available in the initial bosonic single state.

In my preon model #5 (details here if interested: http://wp.me/p18gTT-1l), the higgs has generations and the discovered higgs is third generation, as are the top and bottom quarks and the tau. The vacuum also has in it completely static or neutral matter/fields (the higgs is not completely static as it has weak isospin) of different generations. The neutral matter tends to subdivide into more states with more particles which fuels entropy and expansion. Matter and fields are finite and limited to countable preons. The breaking down of higher generations into lower generations fuels the increase in entropy and expansion.

3) I have never understood the idea of swapping particles as an attractive force. If I throw a cricket ball my body gains momentum away from the catcher. The catcher of the ball also gains momentum away from me. That fits a repulsive force.

In my preon model the repulsion between an e- and an e- is caused by an exchange of preons between the two particles. Both particles change handedness in the interaction, and a LH particle is a different structure to a RH paricle. A complication in my model is that a first generation higgs (i.e. 1/4H) is needed as a catalyst in this interaction, but the preons are swapped between particles.

In the attraction between an e- and an e+, the first generation higgs is also needed, but the interaction is between the higgs and the particles and no preons are swapped between particles. A closed loop is set up between the particle by the creating a 1/4 Higgs- and 1/4 Higgs+ pair. Then in two separate interactions, the two higgs interact with the two particles to change the handedness of the particles and generate a γ- and γ+ pair which could annihilate. It is not an obvious attraction (well at least not to me; I am not a physicist), more like a status quo, but in an environment of expansion and repulsions maybe status quo serves as an 'attraction'?

[Konas]

Great, Thank you for the feedback.