Theoretical and Particle Physics

Within the M o framework, the muon magnetic anomaly is expressed through a compact relation connecting the muon and electron magnetic anomalies (a µ , a e) and the fine-structure constant α. Reformulating this relation leads to a quadratic equation in the muon g-factor g µ , whose solution reproduces the experimental CO-DATA value with high precision. This approach emphasizes the role of M o in unifying fundamental constants and the geometric origin of the anomaly.

The muon g-factor is one of the most precisely measured quantities in particle physics, and its theoretical determination provides an important test of fundamental principles. In this work, we present a relation that connects the muon g-factor directly to the fundamental constant M o , the electron mass, the Planck constant, the elementary charge, and the fine-structure constant. Remarkably, this formulation yields a value of g µ that closely matches experiment, with a deviation of less than 0.02%.

This paper proposes a new framework for particle mass generation based on the Information-Cognitive Compression Field (ICCF) theory, derived from first principles. Unlike the Standard Model, which treats particles as point-like entities with masses imparted through interactions with the Higgs field, ICCF theory views particles as stable solutions of an intrinsic causal and topological structure. The masses, charges, and other physical properties of these particles are determined by their internal geometric and causal structures. Using quantum numbers such as the causal saturation index Sc, main compression topological number nT, and geometric configuration quantum number lg, the ICCF framework offers a generative mass function that can explain the mass hierarchy of particles observed in the Standard Model and predict the mass of yet-to-be-discovered particles. This framework not only provides a new understanding of particle physics but also opens new avenues for experimental verification, particularly in the search for dark matter candidates and other new particles. The paper explores the mathematical foundations of ICCF theory, its connection to existing experimental data, and predictions for future high-energy physics experiments.

This paper presents a novel framework for understanding elementary particles within the Information-Causal Compression Field (ICCF) theory. By interpreting particles as "compression solitons" within a causal compression field, we demonstrate that their intrinsic properties—such as mass, charge, and spin—emerge from the topological structure of their causal flows. The electron, as the simplest and most stable compression soliton, serves as the foundation for this framework, with its spin interpreted as an intrinsic topological twist and its mass derived from the electron's compression state. The paper explores the nature of charge quantization through topological conservation and links the electron's mass and charge to its place in the "compression stability spectrum." Additionally, the framework offers a unified perspective on particle decay and weak interactions, particularly through the concept of "causal ghosts" such as neutrinos. This research bridges the gap between particle physics, topology, and causal dynamics, providing a foundation for future studies in the ICCF framework and advancing the understanding of fundamental particle properties.

Building upon the particle formation mechanisms established in Parts 1 and 2, this paper provides complete mathematical derivations of elementary particle properties from the Auxiliary Modulation Coordinate (AMC) framework. We demonstrate how the electron emerges as the simplest stable fermionic solution, with its mass, charge, spin, and quantum numbers arising directly from the modulation profile structure. The photon derivation reveals why electromagnetic radiation must be massless and transversely polarized, while explaining the origin of gauge invariance from modulation space geometry. Extending to the complete lepton family, we derive the mass hierarchy between electron, muon, and tau leptons, along with precise calculations of neutrino masses and oscillation parameters. Through detailed comparison of fermion and boson modulation profiles, we establish the mathematical origin of particle statistics and explain why the Pauli exclusion principle applies to fermions but not bosons. All fundamental constants-including the elementary charge, fine structure constant, and Planck's constant-emerge as mathematical consequences of the field structure rather than input parameters. These derivations provide the first complete theoretical foundation for elementary particle properties, achieving precision that matches experimental measurements while explaining why particles have exactly the properties we observe.

Building upon the foundational framework established in Part 1, this paper provides a complete mathematical description of how undifferentiated spacetime transforms into discrete particles through modulation resonance mechanisms. We demonstrate that particle formation follows precise mathematical criteria involving four interdependent conditions: metric compatibility, stabilization potential requirements, source current specifications, and entropy-resolved resonance selection. Through detailed step-by-step derivations, we show how these criteria determine which spacetime configurations can support stable particle states and why particles exhibit discrete rather than continuous properties. The resolution of wave-particle duality emerges naturally from dimensional projection effects, revealing this century-old puzzle as a consequence of observing higher-dimensional field structures through lower-dimensional measurements. We provide complete mathematical derivations showing how the same unified entity appears as either wave-like or particle-like depending on experimental configuration, eliminating the need for complementarity principles while maintaining all quantum mechanical predictions. This work establishes the precise mathematical mechanisms underlying particle genesis and provides a deterministic foundation for quantum phenomena.

Summary  We consider a simple parton model of the nucleon built up of three-triplet quarksdissociated into the Gell-Mann-Zweig quarks and «coloured» gluons. We show that the model is consistent with SLAC-MIT and CERN data for inclusive scattering.

Physicists have traditionally classified the forces of nature into four categories: the strong interactions-the short-range forces which describe the interactions between hadrons, such as the nucleon and pion and which bind protons and neutrons into atomic nuclei; the electromagnetic interactions-which bind electrons and nuclei into atomic and molecular systems; the weak interactions-which cause the radioactive decay of nuclei; and the gravitational interactions-which are manifest in the motion of macroscopic objects such as planets. By definition, all particles which interact strongly are called hadrons. In the period immediately after 1967, a remarkable scientific revolution occurred in which it was found that the strong interactions between hadrons could be described in terms of fundamental quark and gluon degrees of freedom which also provided a simple "periodic table" classifying the number and types of observed hadrons. The mathematical theory describing the interactions of the basic constituents of matter is called quantum chromodynamics, a theory in which quarks and gluons are permanently confined by increasingly strong forces at large distance. Conversely, QCD possesses the property of "asymptotic freedom"; that is, the effective strength of the fundamental forces vanishes as the distance scale goes to zero. This is the reason that high energy inelastic large momentum transfer electron-proton scattering can be rather accurately viewed as scattering from quarks that act as though they were free but are permanently confined.

This 400-page best-selling book is the absorbing record of one of this century's most revolutionary discoveries: the first encounter with the deepest mystery of the universe. It is the 20-year search for the quark (the hidden particle inside the proton and neutron of every atom's nucleus that is the assumed basis for all matter in existence. The author, Michael Riordan a physicist at Stanford's gigantic electron accelerator, was there throughout all this time. The search for the quark was just the latest episode in science's relentless efforts to analyze nature into its smallest parts. This is a compelling story of the worldwide community of privileged physicists, who are imagining their way into fame and the future. Sadly, although an interesting story, it provides little convincing evidence of the physical existence for this purely mathematical theory that has gathered a consensus from this small group of privileged scientists to become the "Standard Theory". Indeed, the book ends admitting the lack of experimental evidence and rambles off into metaphysical speculations about the nature of reality: lost in the classic chasm between ontology and epistemology, while costing taxpayers millions of dollars every year.

This 400-page best-selling book is the absorbing record of one of this century's most revolutionary discoveries: the first encounter with the deepest mystery of the universe. It is the 20-year search for the quark (the hidden particle inside the proton and neutron of every atom's nucleus that is the assumed basis for all matter in existence. The author, Michael Riordan a physicist at Stanford's gigantic electron accelerator, was there throughout all this time. The search for the quark was just the latest episode in science's relentless efforts to analyze nature into its smallest parts. This is a compelling story of the worldwide community of privileged physicists, who are imagining their way into fame and the future. Sadly, although an interesting story, it provides little convincing evidence of the physical existence for this purely mathematical theory that has gathered a consensus from this small group of privileged scientists to become the "Standard Theory". Indeed, the book ends admitting the lack of experimental evidence and rambles off into metaphysical speculations about the nature of reality: lost in the classic chasm between ontology and epistemology, while costing taxpayers millions of dollars every year.

This 400-page best-selling book is the absorbing record of one of this century's most revolutionary  discoveries: the first encounter with the deepest mystery of the universe.  It is the 20-year search for the quark (the hidden particle inside the proton and neutron of every atom's nucleus that is the assumed basis for all matter in existence. The author, Michael Riordan a physicist at Stanford's gigantic electron accelerator, was there throughout all this time. The search for the quark was just the latest episode in science's relentless efforts to analyze nature into its smallest parts. This is a compelling story of the worldwide community of privileged physicists, who are imagining their way into fame and the future. Sadly, although an interesting story, it provides little convincing evidence of the physical existence for this purely mathematical theory that has gathered a consensus from this small group of privileged scientists to become the "Standard Theory".  Indeed, the book ends admitting the lack of experimental evidence and rambles off into metaphysical speculations about the nature of reality: lost in the classic chasm between ontology and epistemology, while costing tax-payers millions of dollars every year.

This paper offers some epistemological reflections on the idea of elementary particles, boson and quark-gluon theory, and the nature of quantum-mechanical conservation laws. We apply Occam’s Razor Principle to what we think of as an unnecessary ‘multiplication of concepts’ by ‘the young wolves’ (Feynman, Dyson, Schwinger etcetera) as they were claiming their own territory by trying to distinguish themselves from the first-generation quantum physicists (Planck, Einstein, Bohr, Heisenberg, Schrödinger, Dirac, Pauli, etcetera).

We argue that their abandoning of Dirac’s research agenda (a kinematic model of quantum mechanics) has failed. We have no convincing model of the strong force, and the idea of virtual particles mediating forces resembles 19th aether theory: it looks like a superfluous concept.

We also think it is a crucial mistake to think of the weak force as a force. Decay or disintegration processes should be analyzed in terms of transient or resonant oscillations and in terms of classical laws: conservation of energy, linear and angular momentum, charge and – importantly – the Planck-Einstein relation.

Indeed, we argue the Planck-Einstein relation embodies the idea of the elementary cycle which – as a theoretical concept – has much more explanatory power than the idea of a particle. We feel vindicated by the 2019 revision of SI units (which abolished the mass unit as a fundamental unit) and the recent development of intuitive ‘mass without mass’ models of the electron and the photon.

In this work, we have studied the possibility of setting up Bell's inequality violating experiment in the context of cosmology, based on the basic principles of quantum mechanics. First we start with the physical motivation of implementing the Bell's inequality violation in the context of cosmology. Then to set up the cosmological Bell violating test experiment we introduce a model independent theoretical framework using which we have studied the creation of new massive particles by implementing the WKB approximation method for the scalar fluctuations in presence of additional time dependent mass contribution. Next using the background scalar fluctuation in presence of new time dependent mass contribution, we explicitly compute the expression for the one point and two point correlation functions. Furthermore, using the results for one point function we introduce a new theoretical cosmological parameter which can be expressed in terms of the other known inflationary observables and can also be treated as a future theoretical probe to break the degeneracy amongst various models of inflation. Additionally, we also fix the scale of inflation in a model independent way without any prior knowledge of primordial gravitational waves. Next, we also comment on the technicalities of measurements from isospin breaking interactions and the future prospects of newly introduced massive particles in cosmological Bell violating test experiment. Further, we cite a precise example of this set up applicable in the context of string theory motivated axion monodromy model. Then we comment on the explicit role of decoherence effect and high spin on cosmological Bell violating test experiment. In fine, we provide a theoretical bound on the heavy particle mass parameter for scalar fields, graviton and other high spin fields from our proposed setup.

Ahstract. Theoretical models are an important tool for many aspects of scientific activity. They are used, ia, to structure data, to apply theories or even to construct new theories. But what exactly is a model? It turns out that there is no proper definition of the term" model" that covers all these aspects. Thus, I restrict myself here to evaluate the function of models in the research process while using" model" in the loose way physicists do. To this end, I distinguish four kinds of models. These are (1) models as special theories,(2) models as a ...

The golden ring to which most physicists aspire is a unified field theory that incorporates all of modern and classical physics. Some scientists and others call this a TOE or ‘theory of everything’, but it is no more than false hubris to believe that humans could possibly know and explain everything about the universe at this time. Einstein chased this goal for the last three decades of his life, basing his theoretical research on his general theory of relativity. Meanwhile, the vast majority of scientists supporting the other major accomplishment of the Second Scientific Revolution were investing all of their time and efforts to advancing the quantum theory and their quest has been extremely successful. They originally had no interest in a unified field theory. After Einstein died in 1955, his efforts were all but abandoned because of his philosophical stance against the prevalent Copenhagen Interpretation of quantum theory even though he had been one of quantum theory’s founders. During the 1970s the tables started to turn and quantum theorists became interested in unifying physics, although not from the foundational principles of relativity theory. They claimed that quantum theory was more fundamental than relativity so they began the same quest from a totally different direction despite their claims to be continuing Einstein’s quest.  Throughout the development of the ensuing standard quantum model, superstring theory and many other theoretical schemes, quantum theorists have remained resolute in their conviction that the quantum and relativity are mutually incompatible so the quantum must completely do away with and replace relativity once and for all. However, the quantum theory and relativity are not actually incompatible and, in fact, say the some of the same things about the nature of physical reality. When the similarities are fully defined and studied and the basic assumptions behind each of the theories are altered to reflect the similarities instead of the incompatibilities, only then can the point of their compatibility be determined and act as a unifying principle resulting in a completed unified field theory of the type that Einstein once sought. The development of this physical model of reality is not without irony. Not only is the quantum theory incomplete as Einstein argued in EPR, but Einstein’s general relativity is also seriously incomplete and true unification cannot be rendered complete at any level of reality until all the theoretical models being unified are themselves complete.

Theoretical models are an important tool for many aspects of scientific activity. They are used, i.a., to structure data, to apply theories or even to construct new theories. But what exactly is a model? It turns out that there is no proper definition of the term "model" that covers all these aspects. Thus, I restrict myself here to evaluate the function of models in the research process while using "model" in the loose way physicists do. To this end, I distinguish four kinds of models. These are (1) models as special theories, (2) models as a substitute for a theory, (3) toy models and (4) developmental models. I argue that models of the types and are considerably useful in the process of theory construction. This will be demonstrated in an extended case-study from High-Energy Physics. * I wish to thank M. Stöckler (Bremen) for many illuminating discussions and R. Müller and M. Schön (both Konstanz) for reading the manuscript. A slightly revised version of this paper appeared in W. Herfel et al. (eds.), Theories and Models in Scientific Processes (= Poznaǹ Studies in the Philosophy of Science and the Humanities 44). Amsterdam: Rodopi 1995, 49-67.

Matter engenders a Modified Newtonian Gravitational Potential (MNGP) that has a singularity at a two Normalized Spatial Unit (NSU) distance with a modified gravitational field constant in distance > 2 NSU region, and a saturated potential for distance < 2 NSU region. In Cartesian coordinates, a reference object (RO) resides at origin and a test object (TO) resides on the positive region of the X-axis, the interaction energy between the MNGP of the RO in the X>0 region and the X<0 region with the MNGP of the TO is different; This interaction energy imbalance results an E-space Inter-Domain Interaction potential (EIDIP), a scalar potential. Between two irrotational objects, the gradient of the scalar EIDIP produces a vector field, EIDIPd=d(EIDIP)/dR where R is the distance; whereas between two rotational objects, the angular EIDIP produces a different vector field, EIDIPr=EIDIP*R. The EIDIPd is the source of inter-nucleon nuclear force and inter-molecule covalent bonding force; whereas the EIDIPr vector fields engender the strong force in the inter-atomic range and is responsible for the galaxy rotational velocity anomaly at the interstellar distance. A list of null hypothesis testing node (NHTN), extracted from the EIDIP application model empirical data comparison results, indicates that the EIDIP has 5+ sigma confidence level potential. The EIDIP function, along with the explanatory EIDIP model, could be the missing blocks in completing the Unified theory.

Matter engenders a Modified Newtonian Gravitational Potential (MNGP) that has a singularity at a two Normalized Spatial Unit (NSU) distance with a modified gravitational field constant in distance > 2 NSU region, and a saturated potential for distance < 2 NSU region. In Cartesian coordinates, a reference object (RO) resides at origin and a test object (TO) resides on the positive region of the X-axis, the interaction energy between the MNGP of the RO in the X>0 region and the X<0 region with the MNGP of the TO is different; This interaction energy imbalance results an E-space Inter-Domain Interaction (EIDI) potential (EIDIP), a scalar potential. Between two irrotational objects, the gradient of the scalar EIDIP produces a vector field, EIDIPd; whereas between two rotational objects, the angular EIDIP produces a different vector field, EIDIPr. The EIDIPd is the source of inter-nucleon nuclear force and inter-molecule covalent bonding force; whereas the EIDIPr vector fields engender the strong force in the inter-atomic range and is responsible for the galaxy rotational velocity anomaly at the interstellar distance. A list of null hypothesis testing node (NHTN), extracted from the EIDI application model empirical data comparison results, indicates that the EIDIP has 5+ sigma confidence level potential. The EIDIP function, along with the explanatory EIDI model, could be the missing blocks in completing the Unified theory.