On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 2:14 PM, Eric Walker <[email protected]> wrote:
> > 1. Rational number, and precisely specifiable). > 2. The fine structure constant, α = e^2/hbar*c ~ 1/137.035999074. > This is no doubt an irrational number, despite the numerator and > denominator, because of the irrational components. > 3. A principal quantum number -- generally an integer, but in Mills's > model it appears to be a precisely-specifiable rational number for all but > the most redundant level. > > It is a non-sequitor to replace (1) with (2) without a justification of > some kind. > >From "Calculating the Fine Structure Constant" by James G. Gilson: The formula alpha(N) obtained by MaGoveran and Noyes is remarkable for its simplicity and its numerical accuracy. It depends essentially on integers related to the combinatorial hierarchy and its error in relation to the present day measured value is approximtely one part in 10^9. More details about alpha(N) which was arrived at by arguing from a discrete mathematics or computer bit-string information theory like structure can be found in reference [5] The formula alpha(G) obtained by the present author in 1994 is based on a classically based alternative to Schrodinger quantum theory which is consequently easily linked back to Maxwellian structure. The theory is a photon like zitterbewegung model describing states that retain locality in phase space with circular cycles of a trapped photon representing the usual eigenstates. The Maxwell quanta hbar(c) becomes a classical angular momentum quanta in phase space with quantum number 137 attached. The numerical error in alpha(G) is approximately two parts in 10^9 approximately half the error of Wyler's formula and twice the error of the Noyes MaGoveran formula. A large improvement in alpha (G) will be derived in the following sections of this article. [5] D. McGoveran, H. P. Noyes, Physics Essays 4, 115 (1991) http://www.fine-structure-constant.org/gilg.pdf
