General Science and Philosophy


Symmetry Debts: The "Tetrahedron Model VS the "Standard Model"

Authors: John A. Gowan

Both the "Standard" and the "Tetrahedron Model" rely on symmetry principles to create unified theories of the "four forces of physics" (in the sense of Emmy Noether's great theorem relating symmetry and conservation). But in general I use the symmetries of the "forest", while the standard model uses the symmetries of the "trees". Obviously, these cannot be mutually exclusive categories; in most respects the two theories complement each other. Another major difference is that I use the concept of symmetry "debts" to solve qualitative "why" or conservation problems (Why gravity? What is the conservation reason that gravity must exist as a force in the universe?), whereas the "establishment" uses the concept of symmetry-in-action to solve quantitative "how" or mechanistic problems (how does gravity produce its effects and how can we calculate them?). (See: "The 'Tetrahedron Model' VS the 'Standard Model' of Physics: A Comparison".)

Comments: 10 Pages. numerous small changes

Download: PDF

Submission history

[v1] 2013-11-03 16:28:22
[v2] 2013-12-01 23:03:14

Unique-IP document downloads: 99 times is a pre-print repository rather than a journal. Articles hosted may not yet have been verified by peer-review and should be treated as preliminary. In particular, anything that appears to include financial or legal advice or proposed medical treatments should be treated with due caution. will not be responsible for any consequences of actions that result from any form of use of any documents on this website.

Add your own feedback and questions here:
You are equally welcome to be positive or negative about any paper but please be polite. If you are being critical you must mention at least one specific error, otherwise your comment will be deleted as unhelpful.

comments powered by Disqus