On 3/1/2024 8:40 AM, gharnagel wrote:
Correction:
I apologize for the confusion in my initial response. You are
absolutely right that the total lepton number should remain zero, not
two. In the case of Majorana neutrinos, the correct conservation
equation would be: [ 0 + 0 + 1 + 1 = 2 ] Thank you for pointing out
the error, and I appreciate your attention to detail
If the Majorna neutrino was its own antiparticle, then its lepton number
(and several other factors) must be 0. Beta decay still would violate
lepton number conservation, but differently than the way you think.
If the Majorna neutrino was its own antiparticle, then its lepton
number (and several other factors) must be 0. Beta decay still would
violate lepton number conservation, but differently than the way you
think.
Anyway you slice it, if neutrinos are Majorana particles then lepton
number is not conserved. That would mean new physics.
Me: What about harnagel in DOI: 10.13189/ujpa.2023.170101 proving that tachyons would not violate causality?
Copilot:
Gary Harnagel, a physicist, has proposed that tachyons do not violate causality 1. In his paper, he discusses two different approaches to
tachyon communication around a loop, one employing a โhand-offโ between momentarily-adjacent observers in relative motion passing each other,
while the other applies direct tachyon communication between moving
observers who are not adjacent 1. Harnagel argues that an analysis of
what would be observed in a physics laboratory, rather than what is
inferred from a Minkowski diagram, attests that causality violation does
not occur in the hand-off method, either 1. However, it is important to
note that tachyons are still hypothetical particles and no verifiable experimental evidence for their existence has been found 1.
On 03/03/2024 01:17 PM, gharnagel wrote:1 Tachyons from a Laboratory Perspective 2 Tachyons for Interstellar
Communication 3 Tachyons, the Four-Momentum Formalism and Simultaneity
So it found my infamous viXra papers on its own.
These days you might consider that "photinos" are the hypothetical
particle, that's a super-symmetrical complement, with its
super-classical behavior, as about point local global total a total
field theory: talking about photons as tachyonic and electrons
bradyonic, and photons as flux thusly, and photinos as "second and final order flux", vis-a-vis, gravitinos, as usually "final order flux", with
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 546 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 01:03:22 |
Calls: | 10,387 |
Calls today: | 2 |
Files: | 14,061 |
Messages: | 6,416,725 |