About Field Line Removal and Renormalization, Why no huge Mass of the Higgs'?

  Quanta magazine has an article about the Hierarchy Problem; why is gravity so super weak and the other forces so much like each other in relative strength?

This involves the assumption of the Planck energy where the density is so strong the gravity and other forces become unified. If the Planck energy is assumed, huge gravity inside each quanta around us would implode the Higgs' in at that short radius, giving huge mass to the Higgs' and all the quanta around us.

 Here I think in terms of what I call Field Line Removal. FLR has all the forces unified, an important advantage that just assuming no connection has. People are asking, why have we assumed the Planck energy and the other quanta to be unified?  I would ask though. where is the huge gravity of the quanta around us? Yet the electron has large internal mass and charge by the assumption that renormalization is true. Renomalization was the most well proven  numerical method until the improvements with Gravity and the Nobel priize winning work about pulsars and the gravity waves. 

  And deep scattering experiments show also large internal mass for the electron.

So it's been believed that all the other quanta need a way to renormalize with supersymmetry, and each quanta we see has a partner that also would work the same as renormalization for the electron. 

But these are now totally seen to be unseen with the LHC experiments.

An alternative is as in inflation cosmology, quanta called ghosts with negative energy may have accelerated inflation, yet since this would totally upset quanta around us, the ghosts are believed to have a phase change and somehow not interact with quanta around us at all. Below a certain energy, the Higgs' lose mass and I would say they're external to the quanta.

 (Click Here for The Quantum Magazine website or see link at end of page.)

"In common calculations, first you introduce the quanta, and then the gravity, and let them blend together in hopes of viable renormalization." The newer approach involves a complete separation of gravity and the quanta; they both arrive out of nothing in independence. 

 Yet why do the forces all seem to act in such common ways. E.g. why does gravity have some conservation laws, the electric field all of gravity's conservation laws, and some more of its own and likewise for the strong force?

   Like wheels within wheels it seems like gravity needs another way to not reach the Planck energy inside each quanta so Einstein's idea of the unified field still has some basis. 

In my belief gravity as axiomatic in strength (even so once it forms quanta, the quanta are always sources of gravity, here too I believe they unify. ) This seems like a cause and effect loop, gravity is never without quanta, and vice versa. In this sense, we can't say the strength of gravity is axiomatic, rather only it's combination with the quanta. ) In any event the gravity implodes into the black hole where as a phase change at a certain density, it starts to remove the field lines and reradiate. At this point it converts to electric charges, answering Einstein's question about why the electron has the charge and mass it does..

All the mass around us would be created out of the gravity then radiated out of the jets of the supermassave fields of GRB's, black holes, and other super strong sources of gravity.
It seems that Einstein was both partially wrong and right also about the unified field. This seems like the recent heated debate about black holes and the firewall. Einstein believed in complete continuity for gravity, and the quanta seem to have definite edges. Yet if they are derived from the unified field, how can they be distinct? All around us are these types of paradoxes. Once the Field Lines remove the gravity, they contradict, and "don't know" gravity so well. Even though a direct creator controlling all the world as Carl Sagan says in his book Cosmos, a more indirect creator is still possible.

There isn't a huge outside mass and charge of the electron, because our idea of mass is mostly external. There is large mass inside the electron, but by FLR only some of the force reaches us. If we assume there is huge mass and the Higgs' are also inside the heavy quanta, by the unified field if viable there would be huge mass for each quanta. FLR allows unity of the fields, yet it also makes the forces distinct. This distinction makes it so the electric charge doesn't know the gravity inside, and this is just the conservation law that gravity doesn't have that of electric charge.And no Higgs' inside the electron  wouldn't have mass as much.

  If the gravity waves radiate in and become quanta and gravity is mostly about the Higgs' and there is no Higgs' much inside the quanta as Wilkczc won the Nobel prize for calculating the masses of the fractional charges in QCD with the Higgs' here giving just 1/5th of the mass to them, if there are no Higgs' inside the quanta much, the same might be true in quanta creation in the black hole. Gravity and the Higgs' only implode to the level of the quanta, at this level if more pressure is used, the electric field converts to the strong force, if more than the weak force to what I call superfusiion, a fifth and sixth force also to solve Einstein's singularity woes he was removing from, and so on. Einstein asked, " If a cluttered desk is a sign of a cluttered mind, what's an empty shelf a sign of? Right, a computer!" Thus, about science, at any rate under pressure gravity may convert to electromagnetic fields, these then convert to the strong and weak force, and more pressure yet would convert these presumably to stronger forces yet to power the jets.

Even so the Higgs may remain external to each quanta no matter the mass. Even while renormalization works, there is no superstrong Planck energy inside the electron or huge mass.  The LHC has found no particles of supersymmetry, this would be because FLR is all that gives mass to the quanta via implosion and reradiance of the gravity, and its derived events.

Gravity and the other forces have different strengths because while gravity could be anything relative to the level of the electric charge mass and charge, once the lines of field are removed, there is much more filled up by the FLR. If the electric field has 70% of the Higgs' removed, there's only 20% more for the strong and weak force to remove and operate in this space.

In this idea renormalization isn't so much subtraction of two infinities, it seems like multiplication away of one by the other. .Supersymmetry isn't needed because all the FLR is done by the forces already there. Even so it would act like renormalization, this is why renormalization has been successful; we see all these tests of supersymmetry passing with flying colors, yet where's the evidence in the LHC? If we assume QM and the Planck energy, even near radius in an empty field would be the Planck energy and huge mass. I believe like Einstein the low energy particle he hoped to resolve the Uncertainty loop (partially around the outside quantum radius, as low energy quantum experiments have shown) is the low energy Higgs' like all the mass around us. in SW Ohio! Beyond this level of the change of phase, the smaller the size, the smaller the mass of the Higgs' like mass around us so the idea of these ghosts could be of value in Quantum Mechanics.
This idea that Einstein was partially right about the low energy Higgs' may also mean that using what I call a Higgs' laser could make quantum cryptography unviable, as Einstein might have agreed. My belief is a finite energy of the quantum bubble holds up the wave function before it collapses. If the low energy Higgs' is lower than this level, the information could be extracted without collapse of the cat! Note that the mass of quanta don't change like a law of cat inertia, unless a mouse zooms by, or cat food is sensed...For this reason, unlike a super complex system of prime number codes the web is based on, the relative simplicity of a quantum system with the Higgs' in orbit may have an important conservation law of number where the Higg's can change radius and be moved in and out by the laser, even so the total number of Higgs' may remain the same, while the unique Higgs' code of each quanta may change (other than the same for entangled quanta), this may defeat quantum cryptography.

For the Quantum Magazine page, about the renormalization of the Higgs' Click Here.. 

What About THE MULTIVERSE?

  "It doesn't Make Predictions or Explain Much.."

I was skeptical of another cosmos! Right from the start!

I'm thinking, like, you know, it seems unusual! The main problem seems to be about connectivity of our cosmos with the other cosmosis, cosmosis is this like an inflammation..Right..

Connectivity... what connects our cosmos with all these others?

Sometimes it may seem e.g. like when I speak of other science, e.g. about overcrowding, it may look like mine is a political idea, but I assure you my goals are completely science based, and comedy based..

Newton said he didn't care as much for the outside world as just his time with math and physics, and I believe reducing the overcrowding peacefully by way of reducing competition for increased resources is far more worthwhile and will have far more influence of value on the world than any level of politics, which seems to be failing often, and like Edison I believe war is a tainted enterprise, and politics seems no more viable than most of our life is life is not living, but living well.

But I'm in favor of what

I know (or most of what I know!) and here I offer evidence against the multiverse.

About connectivity, I'd only heard that Tegmark was the promoter of the Multiverse idea. After I'd read that Hawking, Mercini Haughton, and others were in  promotion and that Feynmann was the original editor, up, up and more! I'm thinking, Feynmann! Cool dude. So there is some science here. Where general science goes I often follow.

.

Einstein believed in something like the Multiverse. In one of his last letters to Von Neumann, he said that time doesn't exist. So far so good, more to the point, Einstein believed that before the collapse of the wave function, all futures are possible. This seems to be the cause of the Multiverse idea.

 My original suspicion about the Multiverse, was, what connects us here in our universe with our twin in the other universe? Actually, the multiverses seem like a sort of vast way of rolling the dice, they aren't really connected, just that any possibility exists somewhere out there. Connection really seems a problem since these machines would seem to need infinite hardware to acheive all possibile events, and this would take infinite mass, and this would have infinite gravity, implosion down to 0. Were're here and not here, reductio ad absurdam, doctors could never hold hostages, who could read the ransom note?

About the collapse of the wave function, George Ellis, a physicist from England has the belief that all the possible events are selected out by the collapse of the wave function, like by gravity, the wave function automatically collapses at enough distance, like 2 yards here in our monocosmos..(while I think this idea has problems, i.e. if it's the "edge of time" going up to the Near Earth Orbit has 0 gravity, so time should stop, and e.g. since some radio waves are miles across, it would stop radio astronomy by collapsing the wave function as the wave passes by a strong source of gravity in the distance, and e.g. this would change the spectra of all the stars in ways not seen by astronomy in the lab here with common spectra. Even so I believe just jostling around the quanta would be enough combined with some gravity to give disproof of Einstein's idea about all futures being possible.)

 If this gives us the selecting out of the time that Einstein was unaware of, the events of the quantum wave before the collapse would need connection by something like electric charge ionization or changes in other quantum numbers to have influence. I believe this zone is special, it's lighter than light, so it may compute much faster than light. This is how Schrodinger's cat seem's both alive and dead. The wave function before collapse is a wave, it's non quantum. In subatomic physics Special Relativity has never been seen to be violated in even one experiment. I think of this as due to a change of phase. Make the field low enough energy, and it converts over to faster than light spin. The wave function collapses instantly, and at all points. SR holds so well because at the quantum level or higher, the plus and minus electric charges Maxwell used to predict the speed of light so well based on the forces between them are indeed now quanta. The quanta are constant, so is the speed of light.

Information theory says that information can never be created or destroyed, but higher information is created and destroyed all the time. The same foam  that was used to make your shelf is recycled to make cheeze pizza. In truth information isn't a quanta since you can't know just where the edge is, and waves themselves, like number in math are slippery and not easy to define in a fundamental whey of cheese!

 Selecting out the more amorphus events like Shrodinger's cat involves making them definite. If they aren't definite before the cat-astrophe they have no external influence..

 Thus unlike Einstein Tegmark and others, I believe the possible futures not only aren't many worlds, they have no influence in the sense of relativity, and they only can collapse to limited allowed states, conserving e.g. electric charge, lepton number, baryon number, and so on. The internal events like the EPR and the collapse of the wave function seem to be disproofs of relativity. The EPR is a weak effect, and this isn't strong enough to influence the heavier quantum events much, this is the only sense I believe in the many worlds. I believe in general  Einstein and Feynmann were both wrong. Relative to the quanta, the many worlds idea would only exist in definite, limited ways.

  Ellis was saying, if the future exists in all ways and times, you go to the future and change it, or go to the past and change it..If time is the wisest of all teachers like wealth, the cosmos seems so labor saving..