Authors: Frank Dodd Tony Smith Jr
Consider three cases: First Case (pages 2-4): Does E8 represent Realistic Standard Model plus Gravity ? Consensus = NO Individual = YES Second Case (pages 5-29): Our Universe: Is it Stable ? Consensus = NO (only metastable) Individual = YES Third Case ( pages 30-36 ): Dark Energy and Dark Matter Consensus = Unknown Individual = Segal Conformal Structure This paper is a brief description of interactions between Consensus and Individual in each of those cases, where: Consensus = the Physics Establishment including: Organizers of 2010 Banff Workshop on Structure and Representations of Exceptional Groups (page 3-4); Moriond 2017 (page 4); the Princeton Institute for Advanced Study (page 4); and the Simons Center for Geometry and Physics (page 4); Fermilab, CDF, and D0 Collaborations (pages 9-17); the Cornell arXiv (pages 16; 30-31); CERN CDS (pages 17; 31); LHC, ATLAS, and CMS Collaborations (pages 18-29) and Individual = I, a Georgia lawyer with a 1963 AB in math from Princeton and some physics study at Georgia Tech with David Finkelstein as adviser, but, having at age 50 failed the Fall 1991 Georgia Tech Comprehensive Exam ( a 3-day closed book exam ), I have no physics degree. Version 2 (v2) adds correct viXra number and some details about Fermilab data. Version 3 (v3) adds the First Case, more details, and gives Thanks to ATLAS for ATLAS-CONF-2017-058 stating existence of a possible 240 GeV Higgs Mass State at 3.6 sigma local significance.
Comments: 36 Pages.
Unique-IP document downloads: 96 times
Vixra.org 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. Vixra.org 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.