Show HN: G=(hbar*c*2*(1+alpha/3)^2)/(m_p^2*4^64) ≈ 6.6742439706e-11 (8 ppm)

2 points | by albert_roca 2 hours ago

4 comments

  • albert_roca 2 hours ago 

      EXPECTED OUTPUT:
  
  OBJECT      | UNIFIED           | GR                | DIFF %
  -----------------------------------------------------------------
  Electron    | 2.53264e+22       | 2.53262e+22       | 0.00084794
  Proton      | 2.53264e+22       | 2.53262e+22       | 0.00084794
  Earth       | 9.81997e+00       | 9.81997e+00       | 0.00000000
  Sun         | 2.73810e+02       | 2.73810e+02       | 0.00000000
  Neutron Star| 2.74798e+12       | 2.74798e+12       | 0.00000000
  Sgr A* (Lim)| 7.14606e+07       | 7.14606e+07       | 0.00000000
  -----------------------------------------------------------------
  
  PHASE 2: G DERIVATION
  Formula:   G = (hbar * c * 2 * (1 + alpha/3)^2) / (mp^2 * 4^64)
  Derived G: 6.67424397056e-11
  CODATA G:  6.67430000000e-11
  Diff:      8.39 ppm (within 22 ppm uncertainty)
  • pavel_lishin 2 hours ago

    Does this mean anything? It looks like you just created a formula where the numbers happen to add up. Is there any more significance to this than 111 * 111 being equal to 12321?

    [-]
      albert_roca an hour ago

      Valid question. The significance is that the 4^32 scaling factor emerged earlier in the model as a geometric constraint, and 4^64 appears in this equation, apparently because G is inversely proportional to the square of m_P. Hitting G within 8 ppm using a pre-existing constraint to link quantum constants with the proton mass is statistically extremely unlikely. I admit the precision was a surprise to me too, but the fact that it consistently reproduces Schwarzschild dynamics suggests it's not just a lucky number.

  • al2o3cr 15 minutes ago

    Numerology and LLM slop. Meaningless.

    Consider the "calculation" for ai_unified for an uncharged case:

         L_src = m hbar / (c*mp^2). 
     Expand and simplify and get L_src = m G / c^2

     L_lim = w * L_src = 2 m G / c^2. Also the value of rs.

     metric_factor is irrelevant, as both ai_gr and ai_unified are divided by it since L_lim = rs

     ai_unified = (c^2 * L_src) / (radius^2 * metric_factor). Expand L_src and get ai_unified = m G / (radius^2 * metric_factor)
    This is IDENTICAL to the formula used for ai_gr when there is no charge. Presenting "0% difference" like it is a result is sloppy ignorant bullshitting at best and deliberate fraud at worst.