Arvin Ash: The MAGIC Fine Structure Constant

Arvin Ash claimed in a recent video that the fine structure constant is magical and mysterious and likely fine-tuned presumably by a his favorite god. In reality it is a simple function of the polarizability of the quantum field and not a mystery at all.

Arvin Ash The MAGIC NUMBER that Shaped our Universe! The Mysterious Fine Structure Constant

Physical_Constants_as_Properties_of_the_van_der_Waals_Torque_of_the_Quantum_Field
Fine_Structure_Constant_as_the_Polarization_of_the_Quantum_Field

The Zero-Point Universe

The 100 Greatest Lies in Physics

Goodbye Quarks: The Onium Theory

God Hates Science

Video links

[dosomething]

Please do more reaction videos. It’s actually the most fun way to learn. It’s also the most informative way to understand you.

[TheNaturalLawInstitute]

Arvin Ash is embarrassing. I can't even decide whether he has the vaguest idea what he's saying or just parroting wiki articles.

[jadefreeman]

it's derivation is geometric, i mean all you need is pi and the classical waveform, but what is remarkable it how this geometry relates to the unification of forces

[christopherleubner]

Actually you can use electrons accelerated through a magnetic field to generate photons. Gross magnets can make RF and microwave bands, use microwaves to create a magnetic field and you can get photons in the IR, then use that as the undulator field and you can get even shorter wavelengths. All in ratios consistant with this constant.

[alexleung]

Not related to this video, but if the universe has always been around (no big bang), where does new mass come from? Under what conditions is it created?

[adamc]

I used to like Ash but he sure has drifted into ID a lot.

[_John_Sean_Walker]

Arvin is a journalist, not a physicist.

[SpotterVideo]

Quantum Entangled Twisted Tubules: "A theory that you can't explain to a bartender is probably no damn good." Ernest Rutherford

When we draw a sine wave on a blackboard, we are representing spatial curvature. Does a photon transfer spatial curvature from one location to another? Wrap a piece of wire around a pencil and it can produce a 3D coil of wire, much like a spring. When viewed from the side it can look like a two-dimensional sine wave. You could coil the wire with either a right-hand twist, or with a left-hand twist. Could Planck's Constant be proportional to the twist cycles. A photon with a higher frequency has more energy. (More spatial curvature). What if gluons are actually made up of these twisted tubes which become entangled with other tubes to produce quarks. (In the same way twisted electrical extension cords can become entangled.) Therefore, the gluons are a part of the quarks. Quarks cannot exist without gluons, and vice-versa. Mesons are made up of two entangled tubes (Quarks/Gluons), while protons and neutrons would be made up of three entangled tubes. (Quarks/Gluons) The "Color Force" would be related to the XYZ coordinates (orientation) of entanglement. "Asymptotic Freedom", and "flux tubes" are logically based on this concept. The Dirac “belt trick” also reveals the concept of twist in the ½ spin of subatomic particles.

Modern physicists say the Strong Force is mediated by a constant exchange of Mesons. The diagrams produced by some modern physicists actually represent the Strong Force like a spring connecting the two quarks. Asymptotic Freedom acts like real springs. Their drawing is actually more correct than their theory and matches perfectly to what I am saying in this model. You cannot separate the Gluons from the Quarks because they are a part of the same thing. The Quarks are the places where the Gluons are entangled with each other.

Neutrinos would be made up of a twisted torus (like a twisted donut) within this model. Gravity is a result of a very small curvature imbalance within atoms. (This is why the force of gravity is so small.) Instead of attempting to explain matter as "particles", this concept attempts to explain matter more in the manner of our current understanding of the space-time curvature of gravity. If an electron has qualities of both a particle and a wave, it cannot be either one. It must be something else. Therefore, a "particle" is actually a structure which stores spatial curvature. Can an electron-positron pair (which are made up of opposite directions of twist) annihilate each other by unwinding into each other producing Gamma Ray photons?

Does an electron travel through space like a threaded nut traveling down a threaded rod, with each twist cycle proportional to Planck’s Constant? Does it wind up on one end, while unwinding on the other end? Is this related to the Higgs field? Does this help explain the strange ½ spin of many subatomic particles? Does the 720 degree rotation of a 1/2 spin particle require at least one extra dimension?

Alpha decay occurs when the two protons and two neutrons (which are bound together by entangled tubes), become un-entangled from the rest of the nucleons

. Beta decay occurs when the tube of a down quark/gluon in a neutron becomes overtwisted and breaks producing a twisted torus (neutrino) and an up quark, and the ejected electron. The phenomenon of Supercoiling involving twist and writhe cycles may reveal how overtwisted quarks can produce these new particles. The conversion of twists into writhes, and vice-versa, is an interesting process.

Gamma photons are produced when a tube unwinds producing electromagnetic waves.

Within this model a black hole could represent a quantum of gravity, because it is one cycle of spatial gravitational curvature. Therefore, instead of a graviton being a subatomic particle it could be considered to be a black hole. The overall gravitational attraction would be caused by a very tiny curvature imbalance within atoms.



In this model Alpha equals the compactification ratio within the twistor cone. 1/137

1= Hypertubule diameter at 4D interface
137= Cone’s larger end diameter at 3D interface

A Hypertubule gets longer or shorter as twisting occurs. 720 degrees per twist cycle.


How many neutrinos are left over from the Big Bang? They have a small mass, but they could be very large in number. Could this help explain Dark Matter?

[Verschlungen]

Thank you for showing, @5:27, how those two inane instances of pi CANCEL each other. Yes! (The supposed "role of pi" in the standard alpha equation is yet another factor, like the mysticism of "137! [kinda-like almost], " that stimulates woo-woo reactions to alpha.)
Love your channel, your content, your style. Such a breath of fresh air in this insane world. You are a national treasure (of the Philippines? of the US?) Anyway, a treasure.

[rayfleming]

Arvin Ash The MAGIC NUMBER that Shaped our Universe! The Mysterious Fine Structure Constant

[danD]

Hi ray can't find an email address. would you like to debate bill gaede? jfg can host

[anatolesokol]

Thank you for clearing the origin of the value ~137 by this formulation. The meaning is much important too and you have explained this well. It will be very interesting if you could make a whole video about this relationship of constants and their meaning in terms of physical phenomena, this will make more sense that currently accepted theories... thanks for great job you have done.

[WalterSamuels]

Why not just call the quantum field the electromagnetic field then, as it was originally called? Why do quantum physicists constantly feel the need to invent new words to describe things that already have clear definitions? This is particularly prevalent in quantum mechanics, where it seems every already well defined system has to be given its own unique Star Trek esque sci-fi term. I can only assume it's a marketing angle.

Thanks for the video, this really helped me see things with the correct perspective. It seems like most physicists have it completely backwards. Or perhaps my view is tainted by the fact that every vocal physicist I've seen online (Youtube, Quora and Reddit) are not representative of the physicists at the forefront. It's hard to tell...

[slickwillie]

Best and only sensible explanation of the fine structure constant.

[smlankau]

There is a misunderstanding about it on the way it is represented. The Fine-structure constant (α) with reduced Planck h (α = parameters/ħ) = 1/137 or 0.007297351. But, ħ=h/2π, h/ħ = 6.283185311. So the h makes α = 0.007297351 × 6.283185311 = 1/22. Isn’t it particles? 1:22:1==24?). If we multiply that constant by that value, then we get the ratio that represent the real quantum bits (particles) in the nature. It's like the difference of the speed of light between water and space. A wrong reference frame would show a wrong constant.

[J_X]

Man, you are actually a really smart man. Good for you. Only if you could use that smartness to analyse China without doomsaying and blindly believing that they are doomed.

[coalhater]

Ok so I might be misunderstanding but are you saying that black holes are not real?

[w.harrison]

This may be in your ZPU book already, but between adjacent quantum dipoles is there an electric field? Seems like you're saying the quantum field is not an electric field but a sea of electric dipoles that align to give the effect that we call a field, but how can the positive end of one dipole be attracted to a negative end of a different dipole if there's no electric field between the dipoles? And if there IS an electric field then are you saying Coulomb's law is describing not electric field behavior but rather quantum field behavior? Thanks in advance.

[nolan]

🤔 what determines the polarization and impedence of spacetime? Thad Roberts has that pegged to a hyperbolic figure eight knot.

[KaliFissure]

Though we disagree on interpretation I thought you might be interested in this video as the geometry revealed integrated perfectly into this torsional view