17 May 2013

Down quark mass in the spaghetti model

"Anonymous" is asking questions about the mass of the d-quark tangle. I am not the right person to discuss the problem, but I'll try. I recall that when I first read about tangles defining mass, I was confused. Schiller does not explain the issue very well; but he says that more complex tangles have higher mass and rotate more slowly.

Somewhere else he writes that there is a problem with the down quark: the spaghetti model predicts a smaller mass than the up quark, because the down quark is simpler. A simpler tangle has a smaller mass. What does symmetry have for an effect? I don't know; "Anonymous" writes that it should ease rotation.  Then symmetry reduces the mass and makes the problem worse. And now?

And what is the difference between an up and down tangle anyway? The tangles (page 287) seem the same to me.

12 May 2013

Referees, be courageous!

Both the Templeton Foundation and the Foundational Question Institute fund research on the theory of everything. Well, they say so. But they don't. In fact, less than 3% of their funds go into projects that actually search for a TOE!

Why are they unable to keep their promise and follow their mission? Because of the referees of grant applications. Anonymous referees are not courageous, they are cowards. TOE projects do not get positive referee reports. So they do not get funds.

In normal words, most referees are corrupt.

How do you fight corruption? With courage. With women. With courageous, outspoken women. Get women referees! Get courageous referees!

Look closely: male physics in the US, Canada, Europe, Latin America, Africa, Oceania and Asia is corrupt. As referees, we either need physicists from Antarctica, or we need women.