BTW* These proton, gravitation Large Number Coincidences are strong enough that it pretty much rules out the idea that gravitational phenomena can be attributed to anything but hadronic matter -- and that includes the 80% or so of gravitational phenomena attributed sometimes to "dark" matter. So, does this mean some form of MOND (caused by hadronic matter) and/or alternatively, some weakly interacting form of hadronic matter is necessary?
* and I realize this is getting pretty far removed from anything relevant to practical "AGI" except insofar as the richest man in the world (last I heard) was the guy who wants to use it to discover what makes "the simulation" tick (xAI) and he's the guy who founded OpenAI, etc. On Wed, Apr 3, 2024 at 1:23 PM James Bowery <[email protected]> wrote: > Mark Rohrbaugh's formula, that I used to calculate the proton radius to a > higher degree of precision than QED or current measurements, results in a > slightly higher relative error with respect to the Hubble Surface > prediction, but that could be accounted for by the 11% tolerance in the > Hubble Surface calculation derived from the Hubble Radius, or the 2% > tolerance in the Hubble Volume calculation taken in ratio with the proton > volume calculated from the proton radius: > > > pradiusRohrbaugh=(8.41235641\[NegativeVeryThinSpace]\[NegativeVeryThinSpace]\[NegativeVeryThinSpace](35\[NegativeThinSpace]\[PlusMinus]\[NegativeThinSpace]26\[NegativeVeryThinSpace])*10^-16)m > pradiusRohrbaughPL=UnitConvert[pradiusRohrbaugh,"PlanckLength"] > pvolumeRohrbaugh=(4/3) Pi pradiusRohrbaughPL^3 > h2pvolumeRohrbaugh=codata["HubbleVolume"]/pvolumeRohrbaugh > > RelativeError[QuantityMagnitude[h2pvolumeRohrbaugh],QuantityMagnitude[hsurface]] > (8.41235641\[NegativeVeryThinSpace]\[NegativeVeryThinSpace]\[NegativeVeryThinSpace](35\[NegativeThinSpace]\[PlusMinus]\[NegativeThinSpace]26\[NegativeVeryThinSpace])*10^-16)m > (5.20484478\[NegativeVeryThinSpace]\[NegativeVeryThinSpace]\[NegativeVeryThinSpace](84\[NegativeThinSpace]\[PlusMinus]\[NegativeThinSpace]16\[NegativeVeryThinSpace])*10^19)Subscript[l, > P] > (5.90625180\[NegativeVeryThinSpace]\[NegativeVeryThinSpace]\[NegativeVeryThinSpace](6\[NegativeThinSpace]\[PlusMinus]\[NegativeThinSpace]5\[NegativeVeryThinSpace])*10^59)Subsuperscript[l, > P, 3] > = (1.025\[PlusMinus]0.019)*10^123 > = -0.123\[PlusMinus]0.022 > > > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2024 at 9:16 AM James Bowery <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I get it now: >> >> pradius = UnitConvert[codata["ProtonRMSChargeRadius"],"PlanckLength"] >> = (5.206\[PlusMinus]0.012)*10^19Subscript[l, P] >> pvolume=(4/3) Pi pradius^3 >> = (5.91\[PlusMinus]0.04)*10^59Subsuperscript[l, P, 3] >> h2pvolume=codata["HubbleVolume"]/pvolume >> = (1.024\[PlusMinus]0.020)*10^123 >> hsurface=UnitConvert[4 Pi codata["HubbleLength"]^2,"PlanckArea"] >> = (8.99\[PlusMinus]0.11)*10^122Subsuperscript[l, P, 2] >> RelativeError[QuantityMagnitude[h2pvolume],QuantityMagnitude[hsurface]] >> = -0.122\[PlusMinus]0.023 >> >> As Dirac-style "Large Number Coincidences" go, a -12±2% relative error is >> quite remarkable since Dirac was intrigued by coincidences with orders of >> magnitude errors! >> >> However, get a load of this: >> >> CH4=2^(2^(2^(2^2-1)-1)-1)-1 >> = 170141183460469231731687303715884105727 >> protonAlphaG=(codata["PlanckMass"]/codata["ProtonMass"])^2 >> = (1.69315\[PlusMinus]0.00004)*10^38 >> RelativeError[protonAlphaG,CH4] >> = 0.004880\[PlusMinus]0.000022 >> >> 0.5±0.002% relative error! >> >> Explain that. >> >> >> On Sun, Mar 31, 2024 at 9:45 PM Matt Mahoney <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> On Sun, Mar 31, 2024, 9:46 PM James Bowery <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Proton radius is about 5.2e19 Plank Lengths >>>> >>> >>> The Hubble radius is 13.8e9 light-years = 8.09e60 Planck lengths. So >>> 3.77e123 protons could be packed inside this sphere with surface area >>> 8.22e122 Planck areas. >>> >>> The significance of the Planck area is it bounds the entropy within to >>> A/4 nats, or 2.95e122 bits. This makes a bit the size of 12.7 protons, or >>> about a carbon nucleus. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bekenstein_bound >>> >>> 12.7 is about 4 x pi. It is a remarkable coincidence to derive >>> properties of particles from only G, h, c, and the age of the universe. >>> >>>> >>>> *Artificial General Intelligence List <https://agi.topicbox.com/latest>* >>> / AGI / see discussions <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi> + >>> participants <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/members> + >>> delivery options <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription> >>> Permalink >>> <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/Teaac2c1a9c4f4ce3-Me023643f4fef1483cfab3ad6> >>> ------------------------------------------ Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI Permalink: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/Teaac2c1a9c4f4ce3-Mf1cab12f23ac245a8928deaa Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription
