Guest Post: Higgs ? 126 GeV, Said The Four Colour Theorem
    By Tommaso Dorigo | July 20th 2012 12:06 PM | 20 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments
    About Tommaso

    I am an experimental particle physicist working with the CMS experiment at CERN. In my spare time I play chess, abuse the piano, and aim my dobson...

    View Tommaso's Profile
    The following text has been offered as a followup of the Higgs observation by the LHC experiments, which finds a signal at a mass compatible with the pre-discovery predictions made some time ago by Vladimir Khachatryan - ones which I published in this blog. - T.D.

    Considerations following the Higgs boson discovery - Ashay Dharwadker

    We are pleased to know that our theoretical predictionof the Higgs Boson mass of 126 GeV, also announced in a guest post by Vladimir Khachatryan on this blog, is indeed in very good agreement with the recent announcements by the CMSand ATLAS experiments at CERN. Even as rumours were afoot about the impending discovery of the Higgs Boson at the LHC, physicist Marni Sheppeard wrote a series of posts about our theory (cf. through the looking glass , so,a condensate Higgs ):

    "So the observed Higgs Boson mass simply agrees with Dharwadker and Khachatryan's condensate formula

    mH = ( mW - + mZ 0+ mW + ) / 2

    where a pair of Higgs Bosons form a Cooper pair and undergo Bose condensation attaining the lowest energy state possible. Anyway, a Standard Model Higgs was always essentially a condensate. But if we can elaborate further onthe structure of this condensate, perhaps with our zoo of mirror particles, then in what sense does the Higgs exist? It exists because it reproduces the SM cross section correctly, as observed at the LHC. That's what matters. After all these decades, the Standard Model finally finds its home."

    Let us briefly summarize our Grand Unified Theory based upon the proofof the Four Color Theorem . We show that the mathematical proof of the four color theorem directly implies the existence of the standard model, together with quantum gravity in its physical interpretation. Conversely,the experimentally observable standard model and quantum gravity show that Nature applies the mathematical proof of the four colour theorem at the most fundamental level. We preserve all the established working theories of physics: Planck's Quantum Mechanics, the Schrödinger wave equation, Einstein's Special and General Relativity, Maxwell's Electromagnetism, Feynman's Quantum Electrodynamics (QED), the Weinberg-Salam-Ward Electroweak model and Glashow-Iliopoulos-Maiani's Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD). We build upon these theories, unifying all of them with Einstein's law of gravity. Quantum gravity is a direct and unavoidable consequence of the theory. The main construction of the Steiner system in the proof of the four colour theorem already defines the gravitational fields of all the particles of the standard model.

    Our first goal is to construct all the particles constituting the classic standard model, in exact agreement with Veltman and 't Hooft's description. In this description, the standard model is already renormalized, so we have no quarrel with physicists who favor the perturbative approach. We are able to predict the exact mass of the Higgs Boson and the CP violation and mixing angle of weak interactions, aka the Weinberg angle. We are also able to calculate the values of the Cabibbo angle and CKM matrix for strong interactions. Our second goal is to construct the gauge groups and explicitly calculate the gauge coupling constants of the force fields. We show how the gauge groups are embedded in a sequence along the cosmological timeline in the grand unification:

    SU(5) → SU(3) → SU(2) → U(1)

    Then, we calculate the mass ratios of the particles of the standard model. Thus, the mathematical proof of the four color theorem shows that the grand unification of the standard model with quantum gravity is complete, and rules out the possibility of finding any other kinds of particles.

    We also show that the theory can be obtained entirely in terms of the Poincarégroup of isometries of space-time . We define the space and time chiralities of all spin 1/2 Fermions in agreement with Dirac's relativistic wave equation. All the particles of the standard model now correspond to irreducible representations of the Poincaré group according to Wigner's classification. We construct the Steiner system of Fermions and show how the Mathieu group acts as the group of symmetries of the fundamental building blocks of matter.

    Finally, we show how to calculate Einstein's Cosmological Constant using the topological properties of the gauge in the Grand Unified Theory. We calculate the exact percentages of ordinary baryonic matter, dark matter and dark energy in the universe. These values are in perfect agreement with the seven-year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe(WMAP) observations. Thus dark matter, dark energy and the cosmological constant are intrinsic properties of the gauge in the Grand Unified Theory.


    Risperdal is off patent now I hear. I have to imagine prescriptions are affordable even in India....

    Daniel de França MTd2
    They were not the only ones to get the correct value: 
    Whatever, it was said in this blog long before that.  Anyone can make a prediction.  Bookies got it right a year ago.  

    Proving it was a lot more work than slapping up a paper on arXiv.
    The bookies didn't get it right - they said the highest probability was below 130 gev. Whoopdy-do.

    Obviously this four-color-theorem theory is nonsense. But can someone please explain why its nonsense? Considering that they did, in fact, predict 126 gev in late 2010, I think they've earned a careful refutation by someone who knows what they're talking about. is a start.

    P.S. Tommaso could you please insert some spaces in Ashay Dharwadker's post, so all his words don't run together?

    Another peregrine thing was an equation from de Vries, using a pair of quadratic equations, to predict the mass of W from Z; this was using the positive solution; when looking at the negative solutions, they were (times i) 123 GeV and 178 GeV, somehow above and below the top and the higgs. I think I reported this point back in 2009 too.

    Hmm, no, my report was from 2006
    Input mass: 91.1874GeV
    Output masses: 80.3717, 176.154 i and 122.384 i GeVs. So as I said, a little "over the top" and a little under the Higgs. I was fascinated because Hans de Vries only was aiming to secure the Weinberg angle, ie the proportion between W and Z; he never told about the negative solutions .

    Ashay Dharwadker also claimed a polynomial-time algorithm for maximum clique and a number of other hard combinatorial problems (which implies P=NP, of course). I sent him a simple counterexample with explanations of his elementary errors back in 2009, and now I see he self-published a book still claiming the same! He is probably not even a crackpot, but a scam artist.

    When you design the configuration space to which your calorimeters are designed for, then you hope you capture all the probabilities of the experiment? So you then can say it fits all the parameters up to that point. If you design the space then you are inviting what you have known all along? :)


    Is this "Four Colour Theorum" the one about coloring a map only using four colors?

    I don't like numerology at all, but I must admit that the mass formula for the Higgs looks quite cool. Random coincidence? Maybe...

    If the four-color "theory" is based on SU(5), I would like to know how they deal with neutrinos, and whether they can predict their masses (and mixing parameters as well, if at all possible).

    So, kea is now "explaining" the higgs after years of ranting against its existence?

    I am a bit sceptical and actually reminded of:

    BEDEMIR: And that, my liege, is how we know the Earth to be banana-shaped.
    ARTHUR: This new learning amazes me, Sir Bedemir. Explain again how sheeps' bladders may be employed to prevent earthquakes.
    BEDEMIR: Oh, certainly, sir.

    What is the trials factor on algebraic relations?

    The referred article not only gives the proper mass (or better said the relations between masses). It also explains generations.
    In this respect also the following preprint is interesting: (This is also referred above)  
    This article reasons more around the Dirac equation than the Schroedinger equation. The notion of Schroedinger disk is still used.
    The paper about the cosmological constant adds some interesting corrections. Only the first of the twenty four Schroedinger disks describe visible matter. The other discs concern dark matter.
    If you think, think twice
    Well the math of this is going to be be through the roof complicated, but can you try to run us through it simply. Briefly how does coloring a place in space with one of 4 colors, lead to limits on the three nuclear forces which coexist everywhere in space?
    BDOA Adams, Axitronics
    In the papers about the Grand Unified Theory of the four colors seem to relate to charges. The colors are painting so called Schroedinger discs. The particle frame contains 24 of such disks. Colored fields in these disks relate to particles. Borders of the Schroedinger disks relate to photons, gluons or gravitons.
    The center represents the Higgs.
    Particle frame

    Here follow three generations of the fermions:

    If you think, think twice
    A non-computer proof of the four color theorem would constitute a huge breakthrough in graph theory and combinatorics. It should be noted that the claimed four-color proof on which the author's grand unified theory supposedly rests has never been subjected to peer review and would be rejected by any competent referee. One can find detailed discussion of the flaws in the proof - in actuality, the absence of even an attempt at a proof - on many web sites, including the comments to the earlier post about the model on this blog.

    The article does not rely on the proof of the four color theorem. Instead it uses the Poincare group. I think that the author should have used the Einstein group (introduced by Mendel Sachs) instead. (Still the article uses the particle frame and the Schroedinger disks).
    See the paper “SYMMETRY IN ELECTRODYNAMICS” of M. Sachs.  
    If you think, think twice