On the compactification and reformation of string theory with three large atomic gravitational constants

  • Abstract
  • Keywords
  • References
  • PDF
  • Abstract

    Scientists strongly believe that, String theory is empowered with good mathematics and smartly fits gravity in unification program. Point to be noted is that, by considering the Planck length as characteristic amplitude associated with strings, String theory advances its ideological representation. Very unfortunate thing is that, even though, originally, String theory was proposed for understanding ‘strong interaction’, as Planck length is 20 orders of magnitude less than the nuclear size, it is badly failing in explaining and predicting nuclear scale physical phenomena. Here, we would like to stress the point that, within the scope of observed materialistic physical systems, without addressing the roots of H-Bar and big G, it is impossible to construct a workable model of final unification. In this context, in our earlier publications, we proposed the existence of three large gravitational constants for the three atomic interactions. Based on the three large atomic gravitational constants, it is possible to have three different workable atomic Planck amplitudes and thus there is a possibility for reforming and compactifying the 10 dimensional String theory to 3+1 dimensions. Proceeding further, H-bar can be shown to be a characteristic outcome of the electroweak interaction and big G can be shown to be a characteristic outcome of the three atomic gravitational constants.




  • Keywords

    String Theory; Three Atomic Gravitational Constants; 3+1 Dimensions; 4G Model of Final Unification; Microscopic Quantum Gravity.

  • References

      [1] Barish Barry C and Weiss Rainer. (1999). LIGO and the Detection of Gravitational Waves. Physics Today. 52 (10), 44. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.882861.

      [2] Bezginov N. et al. (2019). A measurement of the atomic hydrogen Lamb shift and the proton charge radius. Science, 365(6457), 1007. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aau7807.

      [3] ChtMavrodiev S and Deliyergiyev MA.(2018). Modification of the nuclear landscape in the inverse problem framework using the generalized Bethe-Weizsäcker mass formula. Int. J. Mod. Phys. E 27: 1850015. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218301318500155.

      [4] De Sabbata V and Gasperini M. Strong gravity and weak interactions. (1979). Gen. Relat. Gravit. 10( 9), 731-741. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00756600.

      [5] Englert F and Brout R. (1964). Broken Symmetry and the Mass of Gauge Vector Mesons. Physical Review Letters, 13(9), 321-323. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.13.321.

      [6] Fermi E. (1933). Tentativo di unateoriadeiraggi β. La Ricerca Scientifica (in Italian). 2 (12).

      [7] Ghahramany N, ShGharaati, Ghanaatian M, Hora H.(2011). New scheme of nuclide and nuclear binding energy from quark-like model. Iranian Journal of Science & Technology. A3, 201-208.

      [8] Ghahramany, N., Gharaati, S., &Ghanaatian, M. (2012). New approach to nuclear binding energy in integrated nuclear model. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Physics, 6(1), 3. https://doi.org/10.1186/2251-7235-6-3.

      [9] Gibbons G.W. (2002). The Maximum Tension Principle in General Relativity. Foundations of Physics. 32, 1891. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022370717626.

      [10] Higgs P. (1964). Broken Symmetries and the Masses of Gauge Bosons. Physical Review Letters. 13 (16), 508–509. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.13.508.

      [11] Kaluza T. (1921). On the problem of unity in physics. Sitzungsber. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. Berlin (Math. Phys.), 966–972.

      [12] Klein O.(1926). Quantum theory and five-dimensional theory of relativity. Z. Phys., 37:895-906. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01397481.

      [13] Kris Pardo et al. (2018). Limits on the number of spacetime dimensions from GW170817. Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics. 7, 048. https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2018/07/048.

      [14] Möller, P., Sierk, A. J., Ichikawa, T., Sagawa, H. (2016). Nuclear ground-state masses and deformations: FRDM 2012. Atomic Data and Nuclear Data Tables, 109, 1-204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adt.2015.10.002.

      [15] Pattie Jr R.W. et al. (2018). Measurement of the neutron lifetime using a magneto-gravitational trap and in situ detection. Science. 360(6389): 627-632.

      [16] RandallL and Sundrum R. (1999). Large mass hierarchy from a small extra dimension. Phys. Rev. Lett., 83(17), 3370. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.83.3370.

      [17] Roberto Onofrio.(2013). On weak interactions as short-distance manifestations of gravity. Modern Physics Letters A 28, 1350022. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217732313500223.

      [18] Royer G and Subercaze A. (2013). Coefficients of different macro-microscopic mass formulae from the AME2012 atomic mass evaluation. Nuclear Physics A 917, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2013.09.003.

      [19] Salam A and Sivaram C. (1993). Strong Gravity Approach to QCD and Confinement. Mod. Phys. Lett., A8(4), 321–326. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217732393000325.

      [20] Seshavatharam UVS and Lakshminarayana S. (2010). Super Symmetry in Strong and Weak interactions. Int. J. Mod. Phys. E, 19(2), p.263-280. https://doi.org/10.1142/S021830131001473X.

      [21] Seshavatharam UVS and Lakshminarayana S. (2011). SUSY and strong nuclear gravity in (120-160) GeV mass range. Hadronic journal, 34(3), 277.

      [22] Seshavatharam UVS and Lakshminarayana S. (2015). Understanding nuclear binding energy with low energy nuclear elementary charge and root mean square radius of proton. Journal of Applied Physical Science International, 6(1),1-13.

      [23] Seshavatharam UVS and Lakshminarayana S. (2017). Understanding the basics of final unification with three gravitational constants associated with nuclear, electromagnetic and gravitational interactions. Journal of Nuclear Physics, Material Sciences, Radiation and Applications 4(1),1-19. https://doi.org/10.15415/jnp.2017.42031.

      [24] Seshavatharam UVS and Lakshminarayana S. (2019). On the role of four gravitational constants in nuclear structure. Mapana Journal of Sciences, 18(1), 21-45. https://doi.org/10.12723/mjs.48.2.

      [25] Seshavatharam UVS and Lakshminarayana S. (2020a). Is reduced Planck’s constant - an outcome of electroweak gravity? Mapana Journal of Sciences. 19(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints201912.0231.v2.

      [26] Seshavatharam UVS, Lakshminarayana S. (2020b). Understanding nuclear stability and binding energy with powers of the strong coupling constant. Mapana Journal of Sciences. 19(1), 35-70.

      [27] Seshavatharam UVS and Lakshminarayana S. (2020c). Implications and Applications of Fermi Scale Quantum Gravity. International Astronomy and Astrophysics Research Journal.2(1),13-30.

      [28] Seshavatharam UVS and Lakshminarayana S. (2020d). 4G Model of Fractional Charge Strong-Weak Super Symmetry. International Astronomy and Astrophysics Research Journal.2(1),31-55. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints201912.0391.v1.

      [29] Seshavatharam UVS and Lakshminarayana S. (2020e). Significance and Applications of the Strong Coupling Constant in the Light of Large Nuclear Gravity and Up and Down Quark Clusters. International Astronomy and Astrophysics Research Journal. 2(1):56-68. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints201911.0398.v2.

      [30] Seshavatharam UVS and Lakshminarayana S. (2020f). Semi Empirical Derivations Pertaining to 4G Model of Final Unification. International Astronomy and Astrophysics Research Journal 2(1), 69-74. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202001.0020.v1.

      [31] Sivaram C and SinhaK (1977). Strong gravity, black holes, and hadrons. Physical Review D., 16(6), 1975-1978. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.16.1975.

      [32] Spenta R. Wadia. (2008). String theory: a framework for quantum gravity and various applications. Current Science. 95(9), 10.

      [33] Stoica O.C. (2016). Kaluza theory with zero-length extra dimensions. Int. J. Mod. Phys. D, 25(11), 1640004. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218271816400046.

      [34] Sunil Mukhi. (2011). String theory: a perspective over the last 25 years. Class. Quant. Grav. 28 153001. https://doi.org/10.1088/0264-9381/28/15/153001.

      [35] Tennakone T. (1974).Electron, muon, proton, and strong gravity. Phys. Rev. D, 10, 1722. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.10.1722.

      [36] Xia, X. W., Lim, Y., Zhao, P. W., Liang, H. Z., Qu, X. Y., Chen, Y., & Meng, J. (2018). The limits of the nuclear landscape explored by the relativistic continuum Hartree–Bogoliubov theory. Atomic Data and Nuclear Data Tables, 121, 1-215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adt.2017.09.001.

      [37] Xiong W et al. (2019). A small proton charge radius from an electron–proton scattering experiment. Nature .575, 147–150. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1721-2.




Article ID: 31432
DOI: 10.14419/ijpr.v9i1.31432

Copyright © 2012-2015 Science Publishing Corporation Inc. All rights reserved.